« Open Thread Preservation Makes It To The NYT Editorial Page »
April 7, 2009
The Shifting School Equation
There wasn't room to discuss it yesterday, but we suspect the public/private school issue is on a number of people's minds. Over the weekend, The Times ran an article about the number of people who bought their apartments in recent years with the assumption that they would send their kids to private school. Now that the economic downturn has made that a more difficult proposition, they are left to confront the limitations of their own school district. In some cases, parents are even considering renting a cheap apartment within a good school district just to get access—after all, it would be cheaper than the $30,000+ tuition in Manhattan. (It's more like $25,000 here in Brooklyn.) Question for the renters and those in the market to buy in Brooklyn: Has the school issue shifted your real estate plans since the downturn began?
The Sudden Charm of Public School [NY Times]
Photo by Steve and Sara
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/9167
Comments
"limitations of their school district" equals code words for lots of minorities. Guess these formerly wealthy white Upper West Side liberals thought that only working-class white kids from Yonkers had to go to schools with lots of minorities.
Posted by: Suburbandude at April 7, 2009 9:36 AM
It seems most of the people in the article still have their jobs - so the only thing that's changed is they bought way more apartment than they can really afford, and since it's not appreciating they can't use it as a piggy-bank to pay school tuition.
Sorry, not much sympathy.
Posted by: Flatbushrising at April 7, 2009 9:38 AM
I am compelled to repost what I contributed to the forum post on this topic on Sunday:
This article made my stomach turn. Wealthy folks trading private school for the best public schools is noteworthy only in that it underscores the continued educational inequity that exists in this country and this city.
Recession woes? Rich people just move to the most expensive neighborhoods in order to benefit from a strong public school. Poor kids are forced stay in their crappy local schools, since private was never an option, and moving to the UES isn't an option, either.
Posted by: curiositykilledthecat at April 7, 2009 9:46 AM
I have no kids yet but if I did I would never buy in an area where my kids would not have the option of going to the public schools. What is going to happen to the guy who has 2 kids and just lost his job and lives in a bad school district? Will he be able to pay 50 thousand a year for 12 years? Will he keep draining his parents accounts or will they say enough! Only buy in good school districts
Posted by: brickoven at April 7, 2009 9:48 AM
*violins*
no sypmathy for them. AT all. especially if you read the article and read some of their self important self righteous snobby entitled quotes. BARF-O-RAMA!
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at April 7, 2009 9:49 AM
Wow... $25,000 a year? Sounds like it would be worth moving somewhere with a crappier job and better schools...
Posted by: tybur6 at April 7, 2009 9:50 AM
Since we're speaking about schools anyway, I just saw this article on the Daily News website about how Slope PreK's are also busting at the seams. They've cited the number of applicants per PreK spot for each PS school. I can't imagine it getting better a year later for K. With this new influx of ex-private students, where PS schools will be then?
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2009/04/07/2009-04-07_park_slopes_prek_angst_growing.html
Posted by: HmmWhichNeighborhood at April 7, 2009 9:50 AM
Isn't Boys & Girls High School in Bed Stuy supposed to be a really good school??
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at April 7, 2009 9:54 AM
or here's an idea.. send your kids to the "iffy so so schools" and work your tail off to make it a better school. isnt that how a lot of supposedly good schools in brooklyn now became that way? parental involvement, and lots of it?
there's really no bad schools, only bad parenting.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at April 7, 2009 9:55 AM
The Pre-K situation is different. At PS 107, which they refer to in the article, they have 18 pre-K slots, or one classroom available. Compare that to about 4 classrooms for K. (Though currently more kids than ever are applying for K, it's true.)
Posted by: gussy at April 7, 2009 9:57 AM
Rob-- you're being too rational and lacking in self-entitlement. Bad, Rob, bad!
Posted by: tybur6 at April 7, 2009 9:57 AM
Dave, it is not. I have two friends that teach there. That school, according to them, is the epitome of terrible - not enough supplies, uncaring staff, etc.
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at April 7, 2009 9:58 AM
Rob, you get QOTD
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at April 7, 2009 9:59 AM
I can't speak for those who thought private school was going to be an option for their kids. Seems to me that the people in the article are in a far different economic class than those who I know. (But then again most of the houses discussed on this site are out of the reach of my cohort) My son's mother and I were keen on public school from the get go. We tried a school in Fort Greene (PS 20), and were displeased with the principal. The next year most of the people we knew also moved their kids out. None of them moved their kids to private schools. We did what many parents do - get a waiver to send our kids to other public schools. Many, many parents we know send their kids to PS 261, which is splendidly diverse and has a principal we like. Others moved over to PS 10 in Clinton Hill, which is much less diverse (overwhelmingly African American), but has the advantage of being a neighborhood school and one which seems to be moving in the right direction in terms of programming. I guess we were lucky in that everyone was able to find a school which they were okay about. Some lied, but most just begged, cajoled, etc. Come on, we are New Yorkers!
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 10:00 AM
Rob just nailed it on the head.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 10:02 AM
Half the kids in PS 321 don't live in the zoned neighborhood. Sure, they started out there, but if you move out of the zone, you can continue to attend your current school. And they grandfather siblings, at least they did two years ago...
Of course there are many other parents who outright lie about their address. Consequently the school is drastically overcrowded.
It's great that PS 321 is a desirable school. It wasn't always, and it wasn't the wealthy who made it that way, either. They've just hopped on board once the way was paved for them, forcing middle class families who can't get their kids into an established school into other nabes, where they are planting the seeds for similar transitions in their local schools. Ditmas Park is an excellent example. 139 has turned around quite a bit, 217 has always been good, and is even better now.
Don't know what the situation is in comparable neighborhoods, such as PLG, etc...
However, bear in mind - we're only talking about elementary school, here. Wait 'till middle school rolls around, and the rug is pulled out from under your feet. Many zones with good primary schools are middle schools and high schools that don't measure up. Unless your kids are super bright and get into some of the top gifted programs (and not all of these are as great as they sound, be prepared to move, stump up for private (if you can get in at that point) or compromise your children's educations by sending them to an inadequate school.
HS is a slightly rosier picture, although some of the best high schools in the borough are nowhere near the desirable elementary schools.
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 10:05 AM
Rob:
Of course you are right (now that should be QOTD!). But you need to hit a sweet spot of energetic parents, flexible faculty, and committed leadership. Schools are political beasts with competing interests. And most parents are (gasp) fairly protective of their children. We want the best for them. Of course what that means isn't terribly clear all the time, but keeping a child in a hostile, unchallenging, and only very slowly changing school doesn't seem fair to a kid who only gets one childhood. Obviously the NYTimes article was superficial and chose a flashy and juicy story - rich people have to send children to public school, boo-hoo. The real story is the committed parents of all economic classes who are working to improve or sustain schools. But we all knew that already.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 10:07 AM
I think this applies to brooklynites who bought in zones with crappy schools and assumed a) they'd be rich enough when the time rolled around to send their kids to private, or b) they'd be savvy enough to work the system and get their kids into a charter or G&T (altho the G&T options in brooklyn are sub-par). Then it turned out, they weren't rich enough and a lot of families who were savvy enough to work the system moved into these zones so it was all harder said than done.
I never assumed I would ever be able to pay 25k per year or work the system so I stuck to the better zones.
And Rob, you diminish the sacrifice made by parents who work their tail off to make a failing school better. Their work almost always benefits the kids that come after their own. Building a PTO that can attract enough families and raise enough money for aides and enrichment programs is a process that can take years and years. The "first generation" of the kids of the pioneering parents see little of that (in the school, at home I'm sure they see a lot of it!).
Posted by: Ringo at April 7, 2009 10:07 AM
BTW middle school or junior high as it was known back in the day, has always been the dead zone of education. And how could it not - kids that age are impossible!
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 10:09 AM
Thanks for the link to the Daily News article. If the elementaries get too overcrowded, the obvious place to make room is to eliminate public school pre-k altogether. Most friends and family I know who live in other cities, and even the suburbs, don't have public pre-k in elementary schools. It's a great thing and prepares kids for K, but given a choice, I'd prefer a less crowded K-5 elementary with the city/state subsidizing universal pre-k at private nursery schools for those who can't afford it. That's what happens in most other places. In fact, full-day K is also something NYers take for granted and in many places, K in still a half day. So the expectation that the city should provide full-day pre-k for kids isn't realistic. In fact, the DOE would be using scarce resources more wisely if they got rid of sibling priorities for pre-K and made those spots income-based.
Rob, I also posted on the previous forum post that parents can certainly improve schools if they make the effort. PS 107, mentioned in the article and one of the most successful schools (score-wise) was certainly not a desirable school 6 or so years ago, when everyone tried to get kids into 321 by hook or by crook, or chose charter schools like Brooklyn New School and Childrens School. Now see it bursting at the seams and enormously popular after a few short years. There's no reason to think this won't happen again in the future -- I find it odd that all these articles make no mention of this as even being a possibility.
Posted by: CGfan at April 7, 2009 10:10 AM
Meh. I don't think Rob nailed much more than public sentiment of people without young children.
If a school is bad because 70% of the kids' parents suck, exactly what can the parents of a kindergarten student do to make the other parents discipline their children?
While the parents in aggregate can certainly be blamed, intentionally sending your kid to a school that does not provide a good environment for learning because you think you can make up for that by being super-dad or whatever is naive, foolish, and irresponsible.
My kid has a few years before kindergarten, and I expect to move twice before he starts school. Once this year to wherever we find the best deal for now. And once again 2-3 years from to move (hopefully to buy) in a neighborhood with a school district I'm comfortable with.
As for private school, we've always planned to send our kid to public school, but having gone to a lousy (and 95% white, fwiw) public school myself, I would seriously consider private school if I couldn't find a good public option, although it would be hard to afford (and we certainly couldn't buy a place and pay for private school).
Posted by: northsloperenter at April 7, 2009 10:12 AM
No sympathy from me either. I have to heartily agree with Rob here.
We pour gazillions of dollars into our public school system only to have a mere quarter of it worth going to, according to many. With better off, smart, educated people doing whatever possible, short of illegality to get their kid into one of these schools, it kind of begs the question as to the fate of the kids in the remaining 3/4 of the system, whose parents aren't as smart, connected or even concerned. Where is the money going, and why can't this get fixed? Long, and old rant that cannot be answered here, I know.
I can understand, however, the concern for good schools, and good educational opportunities, they are one of the foundations of a successful life, but to rent another apartment so your kid can go to a 'good' KINDERGARTEN? Come on. Kindergarten? Getting them into a decent middle and high school is one thing, but I would think the first couple of years of school in a place that is clean, safe and has caring teachers could be found in more places than just the "best" districts. These people need to suck it up, and figure out how to put that apartment money into helping directly in the education of their child, such as in buying art supplies, or books, finding time to volunteer in the school, and doing whatever is possible to make that school a great school for all of the kids. You shouldn't HAVE to do those things, but the reality is, you do. Lots of concerned parents who have never had the wherewithal to consider private schools have been doing so for a long, long time.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at April 7, 2009 10:13 AM
Instead of complaining and trying to squeeze ever more kids into the already overtaxed "Good" schools, target an underfunctioning school but one that shows some promise and has an administration open to new ideas and partnerships. Organize and recruit your fellow wealthy parents to commit to sending their kids. Instead of $25- 30,000 a year have each of them commit to contribute at least $3,000 per child. Focus on something the funds will go to that will improve the overall quality of the school (library, computers, science lab, gym equipment, sound and lighting equipment for the auditorium, chess teacher, art supplies, after school program). Have them use their lofty connections to get organizations to partner with the school. Create a relationship with local politicians to get your chosen school on the radar. With extra funds and a heatlhy partnership between parents and school administrators, within two years you will see a turn around.
Posted by: bedstuy11216 at April 7, 2009 10:17 AM
no ringo, i totally understand your point. my comment above was perhaps a bit too simple and granted i dont have kids to begin with so some would think i shouldnt even be in this thread to begin with. but a lot of times people have to learn to work with what they have. that might mean a subpar school, but hey you know, when life gives you lemons (and it's giving us a lot of lemons these days!).
and speaking of middle schools.. gack! when i accidentally pass a middle school getting let out i run! literally! lol.
i got pelted with rocks once on the LES! (tho actually that was a high school that got let out hahahah)
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at April 7, 2009 10:18 AM
Chicken Jr is being pulled out of private to go to public next year. Going to spend the money on a flash car instead.
Posted by: the chicken at April 7, 2009 10:20 AM
I have two kids, with a third on its way (possibly today - contractions coming pretty regularly now). The eldest will be starting kindergarten in the fall of 2010. My thoughts:
1. Physical safety is the only must-have in my kids' school.
2. Acedmics are a distant second. All the focus on "academics" for 6-year olds has always struck me as a bit ridiculous. Kids do NOT - I repeat NOT - need to get into the "right" elementary school in order to grow up and get an ivy league education or whatever it is you will push your kids into. I went through one of the worst public school systems in rural New England until I dropped out of high shool at 16 (never even got a GED), and now I am an accomplished lawyer. Schooling is often irrelevant. Upbringing is so much more important.
3. Live for yourself. Don't live for your children. Keep them safe and let them grow up and be happy. If you impose a bunch of overachieving values on them they will end up talking about you on a therapist's couch some day. Chances are, your kids are just normal, even though most of you probably insist they are gifted. Love them for the normal kids they are.
Here I am being judgmental again. Oh well.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 10:26 AM
In all honesty, I don't know what all the hubbub is all about... you'll only have to live for 15 or so years under the direct "leadership" of this up and coming maladjusted, close-to-illiterate generation. Then you'll be dead and you can let the Mad Max world take over...
Posted by: tybur6 at April 7, 2009 10:26 AM
Bedstuy11216, that is the most intelligent thing anyone has said about education here in a long time. It is also the only sensible thing to do, given the state of the system. Your statement should be plastered in the Times, and sent to every parent in this situation.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at April 7, 2009 10:30 AM
PS 8, PS 321 and MS 51 are three schools where the school equation will shift noticeably.
For years, wealthy parents in Brooklyn Heights have sidestepped public schools and the resulting drain brain at PS 8 was obvious. For the locals, St Ann's and Packer are the neighborhood schools. Will these now not so wealthy parents start sending their kids to PS 8? During it's turnaround period PS 8 would admit almost any child in District 13. If PS 8 gets an influx of locals, the window of opportunity for family 'working the system' will close for sure.
The same came be said for PS 321 and MS 51. Even with a good public school alternatives, many PS parents were in a financial position to sent their kids to the Berkeley Carrolls and Poly Prep's of the neighborhood. If these parents decide that 321 is in their best financial interest, this will result in even more kids at an already crowded school. It would also certainly accelerate the redrawing of the school boundary. So if your thinking about buying 321, think carefully about future boundary changes.
Posted by: Colonel Steve Austin at April 7, 2009 10:30 AM
Amazing how everyone in the article has a 'really smart kid'.
I'm not a parent, and had not really thought much about school districts in considering where I might buy. Reading about these people I just think of it all as one of the trade-offs involved in living in NYC. Not everyone can have the perfect apartment with the best schools in a 'safe' but interesting neighborhood - so these parents just have to decide what their priorities are and act accordingly.
As a sidenote, I think one of the main drivers of the 'suburbanization' of NYC that is often derided on this board has been that more parents have decided to stay in the city rather than move to the suburbs. This is more the case in Manhattan than Brooklyn. Not necessarily a bad thing, but think that young families staying in NYC is a cause as well as an effect of other changes in the city.
Posted by: etson at April 7, 2009 10:31 AM
I strongly agree with Lechacal. If you get over the preconception that your kids have to go to private school you and your kids will be in a much better place financially and in terms of preparation for life.
Posted by: jawbreaker at April 7, 2009 10:33 AM
hey Archi, interested in your thoughts re 139 v 217 as Chicken Jr has got into both.
Posted by: the chicken at April 7, 2009 10:34 AM
The day they started busing in NYc was the day they made the first big mistake. Instead of trying to improve the schools that needed it the most, they just started shifting kids around. Schools with good reputations for education were always a premium in NYC and the Bd of Ed, instead of trying to make all schools good, opted to concentrate resources and money on those that were already "good."
Kids spent too much time on buses, getting up far earlier, leaving when the buses did so afterschool programs suffered, and having less time at night to do homework. Let's not even add in all the gov/union issues to the mix- the real problems were never fixed. Poorly performing schools were overlooked and kids in them endured horrible conditions. My brother-in-law, my sister and several friends are teachers- some of the stories are hair-raising and infuriating. I'm not talking about the kids- I'm talking about the programs, the way money is apportioned, the lack of supplies, even bad teachers.
When parents get involved in their kids school it's a plus.But as taxpayers, I think we all have a right to say something about the state of education in this city if we care about the future, kids or no.
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 10:37 AM
"Amazing how everyone in the article has a 'really smart kid'.
Posted by: etson at April 7, 2009 10:31 AM"
Not me - Chicken Jr is notoriously dumb. She's pretty funny though so we may send her to clown school when she's older.
Posted by: the chicken at April 7, 2009 10:38 AM
"I went through one of the worst public school systems in rural New England until I dropped out of high shool at 16 (never even got a GED), and now I am an accomplished lawyer. Schooling is often irrelevant."
I think you underestimate your personal accomplishment by claiming schooling is irrelevant.
If you took 200 people with your natural abilities and sent 100 to good schools and 100 to terrible schools, you would absolutely find a significant difference in the number of accomplished lawyers or other highly educated professionals in the two groups.
Likewise, if you had the same 200 people all in good schools but 100 of them have crappy parents, you would see a significant difference in outcomes.
Parenting and schooling both matter.
I do agreed with the sentiment that grammar school matters less than middle school or high school from an academic perspective, although from a social perspective grammar school can be pretty important. For example, my nephew went to a school with discipline problems where physical confrontations between children was common and punishment was doled out equally to instigators and people defending themselves. His focus was about 90% on the kids he had confrontations with and the fallout there.
His parents finally got him moved to another school fortunately. Same parents, same kid, different school, and now he's happy, enjoys learning, and making friends.
Posted by: northsloperenter at April 7, 2009 10:38 AM
There is a huge inequity between Districts 13 and 15 in terms of school quality. It is true that because of a number of factors, there are more choices for parents looking for a high-quality, progressive elementary education in District 13 than just a few years ago, as witness PS 11, 8, and the Community Roots Charter School. These are all schools in which parents have become heavily involved, with an administration that welcomed them into the school community and into the classrooms. Involved parents donate not only time but money and resources. There are other schools ripe for such involvement and turnaround, i.e. PS 56. And there are huge social reasons to try and keep your child in the neighborhood for elementary school.
The middle school situation in District 13 is far less optimistic, however, and there simply are no progressive, selective, rigorous schools available aside from Arts and Letters, which had 1,000 applications last year for approximately 80 slots--and this school is open to Districts 13, 14, 15, and 16, so getting in is not at all a sure thing. There are other middle schools in the district that promise high academic standards, but they also promise a very traditional, rigid, authoritarian method of education.
Which is why so many Dist. 13 families leave the public school system for middle school, or move out of district, or move their kids out of district. It's not just the privileged families portrayed in the Times article, it's many, many working families who don't want their kids warehoused for three years in underperforming middle schools or schools with a very rigid, traditional approach to education.
Posted by: since 2000 at April 7, 2009 10:40 AM
To turn the issue on its head: how does moving the kids of wealthy parents into a failing school help that school? Class sizes are too large in NYC in nearly every school. 29 kids per teacher is normal. I live in Brooklyn Heights, zoned for PS8. Lots of parental involvement and money. But roughly a third of the kids don't test at grade level and -- being honest -- it's because a third of the kids come from the projects. How do you teach to a class where 1/3 of your class came to school knowing how to read, 1/3 are learning how to read, and 1/3 doesn't even know how to turn the page of a book and/or don't speak English? How does a teacher deal with a class like that? Rich parents would tell you that their kids in that situation learn very little. Maybe you think 1st graders need only be a clean place with good teachers, they'd tell you that studies say these are the most important years and that the best teachers can't teach in this situation. Parents with kids who are not at grade level will tell you the teachers are spending too much time with kids who don't need the help.
I was for the not-perfect school grades only because it recognizes two facts: we need to pay teachers for performance and we need to figure out what performance means. Does a teacher at 321 (with no projects) or 29 (with no projects) get bonuses because their kids can read above grade level in June when in fact they could read above grade level back in September? Isn't it far harder for a teacher in a failing school to get kids who can't read at all to read a little?
I don't think we need more money. I don't think sending the affluent kids into poorer schools help anyone. I think we need more early education, smaller class sizes and better teachers. And in a way, I think we may be moving in the right direction.
Posted by: Ringo at April 7, 2009 10:45 AM
"Isn't Boys & Girls High School in Bed Stuy supposed to be a really good school??"
Posted by: daveinbedstuy
Umm... no, it's not. 4 year graduation rate: 34.9%
Considering the disadvantaged kids (Free Lunch: 59%) from lousy neighborhoods that go to the school, maybe not as terrible as it could be. They settled a suit not long ago on policies of warehousing kids in the auditorium and pushing them out of the school.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/nyregion/thecity/30disp.html?_r=2
Posted by: Bklnite at April 7, 2009 10:47 AM
Colonel Steve Austin your information is out of date. PS 8 is already overcrowded with middle school parents from Brooklyn Heights who send their kids there -- you can't get in if you live out of zone.
FYI -- PS 8 is an example of a very quick turnaround achieved in a very short time with a dedicated group of parents and the DOE putting a good principal in place. Same as PS 107, which parents did not choose to send their kids to years ago. I guarantee you that as more parents stay or choose public, this will happen quickly in other neighborhoods as well. The concern here is well-overblown. The more parents who choose public schools, the better the schools will be, even if they are overcrowded.
Posted by: CGfan at April 7, 2009 10:48 AM
Chicken -
217 had a better reputation and better facilities. The gifted program is really wonderful, if you can a place in the program.
139 varies quite a bit, as the quality of your child's education depends greatly on which "mini school" he or she gets into (yes you have to apply to one of these programs - forget the GE program).
And let me say something about my MS experiences in District 15. I have wonderful things to say about PS 321, for the most part. MS 51 is certainly not a bad school, but if you are expected the quality of education your child received at 321, you will be very disappointed. My child was told by a science teacher at 51 that the 321 children were more advanced that the children from other district 15 elementary schools, and they would have to "wait" while their peers "caught up." I did not find this to be acceptable. Furthermore, my daughter wanted to take French, but was placed in Spanish because the school "had not anticipated so many children wanting to take French, and therefore did not hire enough French teachers."
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 10:54 AM
I'm unfamiliar with the middle schools in Brooklyn, but wouldn't it make sense that the students from PS. 321 and other good elementary schools will funnel enough kids into middle to create a tipping point of "good" kids?
If enough parents can no longer afford private, then perhaps the larger numbers of students from the better schools will increase the viability of the iffy ones.
I have to say...I'm personally not a fan of private school in general. I've met very few people who went to private who ended up appreciating it later in life, and most speak quite negatively about it. I think the private kids have a lot more issues in general than those who went to public school.
I think private school is mostly for the parents so they can feel good about themselves.
Posted by: 11217 at April 7, 2009 10:59 AM
quote:
Furthermore, my daughter wanted to take French, but was placed in Spanish because the school "had not anticipated so many children wanting to take French, and therefore did not hire enough French teachers."
there were tons of classes i couldnt take in school because they filled up, and / or weren't available. couldn't you teach her french on the side if she was so bent on learning it? im not putting you down in any way, but sometimes people need to pick their battles better. i went to an urban school system in north jersey and we couldn't even take a language until 9th grade (the beginning of high school). We had K-8 and then 9-12. i think middle schools are inherently problematic to begin with. you can't warehouse a gazillion kids with new raging hormones going thru puberty and tough family issues in an environment like that.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at April 7, 2009 10:59 AM
the graduation rate for the nyc public school system is less than 50%. 'nuff said.
depressing stuff.
Posted by: benno at April 7, 2009 11:02 AM
Answer: Move to the Suburbs. Cheaper, Safer and Better Schools. Now you can sleep at night (or on the train).
Posted by: NewYawker at April 7, 2009 11:06 AM
Rob, I take your point, and I certainly did not pull her out of the school because of this, but I'll tell you - kids in good suburban public schools get to take French if they like (or Spanish, and even in some cases, Chinese, Russian, and Italian). It irks me that city kids in "gifted" programs (and also non-gifted programs) are not afforded the same educational standards. It also bothers me that opportunities are dangled in front of children by the "good schools" and then taken away on the first few days of school.
My son was in a non-specialized MS in district 13. No foreign language is available to him. I think this is a huge insult to children growing up in a not just a multicultural city, but a mutlicultural world. And yes, he takes Japanese lessons, privately. And yes, I did teach basic French to my daughter, but my skills ended there.
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 11:06 AM
Ringo
Project kid does not equal stupid kid. That is to put it nicely a gross mistatement. The list of what money can do is immeasurable. But it also takes a focused approach and commitment to put the money to good use. Here are just a few examples of what a school with extra funds can do.
1. hire class room assistants so the teach does not have to solely manage 29 kids; and kids who are not grasping as quickly as others can get some one on one help.
2. afford to keep the school open and pay folks to supervise an after school program. There you can offer a broader and enriched learning experience (art, turoring, etc)
3. Fund more school trips, even local trips to shows and museums so the kids have hands on experience and are exicted about coming to school.
4. improve their physical environment
5. put on plays and shows that the kids can be proud of.
6. have plenty of books available in the library and classroom so that they can take them home to read, since their family may not have the diveristiy of reading material they will need or books on varying grade levels.
ALL of the really "GOOD" schools have active and proficient fund raising activitities that pull in hundreds of thousand of dollars to supplement the schools budget.
Posted by: bedstuy11216 at April 7, 2009 11:07 AM
How can a school like PS8 turn-around overnight? How can a school like 321 be at the top year over year - what "parent involvement" can possibly result in such successes, when nearby other school children suffer with below grade level achievement?
The answer is - it has little to do with parental involvement at the school and ALLOT to do with parental involvement in the HOME.
People may resent the "rich" who live within these neighborhoods (most really are FAR FAR from rich in private jet, beach home definition), but the truth is that on the whole certain child rearing is preparing children far better for academic achievement than others.
Sorry but in the better public schools and virtually all the private schools - huge percentage of kids come into kindergarten understanding the alphabet, numbers, with large vocabularies and other not so easily definable skills that make their academic success almost 'easy' vs other kids who have no training in any of the fundamentals of learning.
It isnt parent involvement in the school that causes academic success, it is parental involvement at home that does it - and the in-school involvement is just a 'symptom' of their overall emphasis on education.
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 11:11 AM
i think the overcrowded kindergarten problem will disappear around 2012-2013. kids who start before then will be like sardines, and kids that start after then (housing bust +5 years) will be hearing crickets. baby boom officially over. another benefit will be that private schools will "reassess" their high tuitions once demand plummets.
Posted by: jingle mail at April 7, 2009 11:14 AM
Unfortunately safety is a really important consideration in deciding whether you can send your kid to the neighborhood school. When we lived in Clinton Hill, we were zoned for PS56, and I heard too many first-person stories of kids getting beat up to even think about it.
We were really lucky and I got my daughter into a gifted program at an elementary school in District 2 in Chinatown where she thrived. Better yet, she was eligible for District 2 middle schools.
This morning I got a call from a friend who lives in Crown Heights and is zoned for a shitty, dangerous elementary school. Her 5-yr-old got into PS9 in Prospect Heights (improving) and PS11 in Clinton Hill (improved). She's still waiting to hear from Brooklyn New School which is in District 15. I told her that although if it were my kid I'd really want to pick PS11, I'd have to think about the middle school nightmare that is District 13 and consider Brooklyn New School if her kid won the lottery. This kid is FIVE YEARS OLD! It's the shame of the city that there aren't better public schools in NYC for ALL STUDENTS.
BTW, my daughter graduated 5th grade in a class of 32. I had many discussions with the principal of her elementary school about class size. The principal feels very strongly that she does not want to exclude students that want to attend her school and she would have to do so if she cut class size. She would rather have a great teacher with 50 kids than a shitty teacher with 10 kids.
Posted by: rf at April 7, 2009 11:19 AM
People get very concerned about "good" school districts & zones with their little ones, but it matters less as they get older. If your kid starts pre-k or kindergarten in a school and later you move within the city the kid can continue there through 5th grade and can go to middle school in that district.
For middle school, you may find you're better off sending the kid to a school outside the district and by then kids can handle going to Manhattan which opens up more options.
High schools mostly take kids city wide, so where you live matters only as far as commuting feasibility. In the boro, there's Brooklyn tech and maybe a couple of other good schools, but otherwise the best HS options for Brooklynites are in Manhattan.
Posted by: Bklnite at April 7, 2009 11:19 AM
Rob nailed it. The overwhelming evidence from ps 11 is that parent involvement and strong leadership can lead to a school that improves rapidly. in the 2 years that our child has been at 11 we have seen the mood of the school improve dramatically- and it wasn't bad when we first went. I'm not talking about test scores, I'm talking about general vibe and sense of focus. I have seen the virtual Y improve and the after school enrichment program expand dramatically with great results.
I'm not writing this simply to toot ps 11's horn but to verify what Rob had to point out- and point out that it doesn't have to take years and years for a school to improve.
I can see that my involvement in the classroom, as well as that of other parents has a powerfully positive effect. Spending time in the class allows me to know my child's friends, and observe her interactions with them.
To piggyback on the idea of going to a local school- in pre-K we didn't get a spot at 20 or 11 so went to 282 in PS. it was a good school and a great class with a great teacher. But it was a hike and that made it difficult for our daughter to see friends afterschool. It's made a profound difference to go to a school that is walkable.
Posted by: filmmer at April 7, 2009 11:20 AM
BedStuy, nobody said 'stupid'. Talk about a "gross mistatement". Honestly, your idea about "kids not grasping as quickly" is far more insulting. These kids surely grasp as quickly, but to keep denying that kids who don't have the benefit of preschool, or early education, or a stay-at-home parent, or a dedicated nanny, or a great daycare, or a two parent home, or a an english-speaking household or any combination of the above are BEHIND when they start school and STAY BEHIND throughout school is not helpful to these kids. You can draw a line all the way to the drop-out rates.
The two universal predictors in how a child does in school are:
1. if the mother of the child is a college graduate, and
2. the number of books in a home.
I don't think this the profile of the majority of parents in the projects.
Also, PS8 has 1-6 on your list. Still, a third tests below grade level. Not acceptable. I think PS8 is a good school. I'm just replying to the idea of moving kids of "wealthy parents" into poor performing schools and "working your ass off" is not really all that helpful to teachers.
Posted by: Ringo at April 7, 2009 11:20 AM
fsrq--My daughter went to PS130 in Chinatown. It is a Title I school with over 90 percent of students coming from free-lunch-eligible families (maybe less now because the nabe is gentrifying). It has some of the highest test scores in NYC.
Yes, most of these kids are Chinese-American--but that adds to the burden of the school in that many of them are English language learners and most of the parents do not have a working knowledge of English.
The parents' assn. cannot begin to raise the kind of bucks that the whiter schools in District 2 can generate, but the principal is the very best. I believe in every way that the most important element in a public school in NYC is a great principal.
Posted by: rf at April 7, 2009 11:23 AM
thanks Archi - good info. Would you take 139 in the SOAR program over 217 outside of the gifted program?
Posted by: the chicken at April 7, 2009 11:30 AM
"I live in Brooklyn Heights, zoned for PS8. Lots of parental involvement and money. But roughly a third of the kids don't test at grade level and -- being honest -- it's because a third of the kids come from the projects."
nope.
PS 58 in Carroll Gardens- Same scenario. High grades and school rating.
I don't have kids but just had to throw that in there.
Posted by: Prodigal_Son at April 7, 2009 11:32 AM
to brownstoner's original question - i wish that i had thought about school district when we moved to bed-stuy. we did not have children at the time and it wasn't a thought. we moved where we got the most bang for our buck in an 'up and coming area'. hind sight being 20/20 - i think these UES folks are doing the right thing by moving to a good school zone 'just in case'. now that i am here with kids, i just have to figure it out like everyone else in my hood, whom private school is not an option for.
i do believe that private school is for the parents - just to say 'look what i can afford', look at me, look at me.
Ringo:
If projects were an issue -then answer me this, why is PS 21, located in bed-stuy, directly across the streets from the projects, listed consistently as one of the best public elementary schools, right up there with PS 8, 29 & 321? i would stand by that there are NO wealthy or white children in attendance! your comment is pure ignorance!
Posted by: bkny at April 7, 2009 11:33 AM
The current test scores at PS 8 are misleading because the school's demographic has shifted. The school has been closed to out-of-zone kids for a couple of years now (except for siblings of current students), so the lower classes are comprised almost entirely of families who live in the Heights and DUMBO. There is way less diversity in these classes, and class size has risen sharply--though construction is to begin soon on an annex with additional classrooms.
The upper classes are far more diverse, both economically and racially, and it is those classes (3rd-5th grade) that take the standardized tests that are reported on the DOE and Inside Schools websites. Test scores have already risen but probably will rise quite a bit in the next few years as the demographic shift is reflected in the NYC standardized tests.
PS 8 is a success by any standard, not overnight but one that has been building for several years. The principal is really gifted and is especially skilled at hiring staff. But a large part of the school's success has to do with the fact that neighborhood parents bought in and started sending their kids there. And so it has become a great choice for exactly the demographic that can give their children advantages to begin with, i.e. books, a rich verbal environment, cultural enrichment, all of which do predict school success.
Posted by: since 2000 at April 7, 2009 11:37 AM
No Ringo , you did not say stupid. You just correlated the 1/3 of the project kids at PS 8 with the 1/3 of the kids who performed badly on the test and the fact that PS 321 and PS 29 do well and have no project kids.
I don't know PS 8s situation sounds like they are in the beginning stages of a turn around. As I said it takes more than money to pull a school up. You need both commitment and forward thinking but with out the $$$$$$ it's all dreams.
And I agree that kids who have a college educated parent and books at home have a leg up on the competition. But it is that very fact that necessitates that the schools have the funds and wherewithal to help balance the playing field.
Posted by: bedstuy11216 at April 7, 2009 11:38 AM
Ringo: "but to keep denying that kids who don't have the benefit of preschool, or early education, or a stay-at-home parent, or a dedicated nanny, or a great daycare, or a two parent home, or a an english-speaking household or any combination of the above are BEHIND when they start school and STAY BEHIND throughout school is not helpful to these kids."
your comments are absolutely unbelievable to me! i didn't know you were such an expert on the projects - you probably have spent alot of time there collecting this useful data.
did you read 'rf' comment?
Posted by: bkny at April 7, 2009 11:43 AM
P-D, How did you obtain your waiver to transfer your child? I was granted a transfer from the Enrollment Office and they are having trouble placing my kids in another school due to overcrowding. Other than my zone school, the closest school to me is P.S. 261.
I agree that the whole system needs to be overhauled. The Board of Education needs to realize that just a handful of good public schools is not a good reflection on their performance. There should be more repercussions when a school fails. If a school fails, the principal and assistant principals should have some accountablility, if a certain amount of schools are failing in a district, the superintendent should be held accountable, etc. until it reaches the Chancellor's level. The Chancellor has been praised for his job performance, but the fact that we have so many schools that are failing says otherwise.
Posted by: faithful at April 7, 2009 11:46 AM
HELLOOOOOO! here i have 18 years of private school education and seriously, all i have to account for it besides my drafting drone job -and poor grammar- are nagging boomer parents who constantly tell me i am unappreciative, ungrateful, unsupportive blah blah of THEIR decision to sacrifice like martyrs for the sake of making tuition payments. Dear mom and dad, that was your choice, therefore your concequence.
thanks all, time to get up from the couch now. ;-)
Posted by: bowl of dicks at April 7, 2009 11:48 AM
58 is a really great school and an interesting case. when I have more time. it has to do with projects not being the same everywhere and 58 has a large immigrant population which can bring up test scores (ditto Shuang Wen)
21 is great school too. And a great example of why schools with kids from the projects can't be great schools. They can be! Of course! Just saying that adding wealthy kids doesn't add to the equation. "NO wealthy or white children in attendance!" THIS is what I'm saying. Often a classroom of kids on the same level or near the same level is a TEACHABLE class.
Posted by: Ringo at April 7, 2009 11:49 AM
In my opinion this is a huge opportunity for the FG/CH schools like PS 20 and PS 11.
For all the talk about Diversity in FG, a quick walk past any one of the local schools tells an entirely different and telling story.
I would really like to know why more white and multi-cultural parents aren't sending their kids to schools like PS 20 and PS 11?
Without the chance to game the system through variances and other loopholes and an uncertain financial future clouding private school aspirations, FG/CH parents will have no choice BUT to sent their kids to their community schools.
How is the FG stroller set going to deal with this 'crisis'?
Posted by: Colonel Steve Austin at April 7, 2009 11:51 AM
rf - are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. I am not familar with the school you mention but your description seems to indicate that a culture of learning is well ingrained in a majority of the parents/families there. Please do not mistake my earlier quote to indicate that it is wealth that makes children well prepared for learning (it can obviously help to some degree and it might be a generational by-product of an emphasis on education) - my point is that it is what takes place in the HOME that is by far the MOST important factor in determining what happens in school. I am sure a good principal helps overall, but the best principal in worst schools and the worst principals in the best schools wouldnt/couldnt change the achievement rates that vary by massive amounts between these schools/children.
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 11:51 AM
Ringo:
"58 is a really great school and an interesting case. when I have more time. it has to do with projects not being the same everywhere and 58 has a large immigrant population which can bring up test scores (ditto Shuang Wen)"
I'll be waiting for you to "have more time".
I'm curious where Carroll Gardens "immigrant population" comes from.
Posted by: Prodigal_Son at April 7, 2009 11:54 AM
Architerrorist: So what if your kid wasn't able to take french? Is she happy? Does she have friends? Is she developing confidence and good social skills?
Do you really think she actually "wants" to learn French, as opposed to having multilingualism strongly suggested to her (one of the many ways liberal and culturally white parents attempt to live vicariously through their children)? I bet she doesn't give a wet slap about becoming multi-lingual.
And fwiw almost no one who learns a second language in school becomes fluent (move to another country if you want to do that). Most of them manage to forget almost all of their language skills by the time they are working adults.
Being judgmental again.... uh-oh.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 11:56 AM
Bed-stuy - "And I agree that kids who have a college educated parent and books at home have a leg up on the competition. But it is that very fact that necessitates that the schools have the funds and wherewithal to help balance the playing field."
I do not think it is the "college education" and the "books at home" that causes the higher academic achievement; they are a by-product of a family culture of educational emphasis and I'm afraid that there is no amount of "funds or wherewithal" that can materially bridge this gap.
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 11:57 AM
CSA - i believe the reason you don't see the diversity at PS11 & 20 is b/c alot of these diverse (white) parents have young children. i went on the prek tour at PS 11 a few months ago. almost every class room was 100% black. however, i was 1 of maybe 5 blacks that showed up for the tour. there were at least 100 parents in attendance for the tour. so the shift is clearly happening...
Posted by: bkny at April 7, 2009 11:59 AM
SERIOUSLY PEOPLE -- "HIGHER ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT???" IN FRIGGING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL???? STOP DOING THIS TO YOUR POOR CHILDREN!!!!
(had to resort to all caps yelling for this one)
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 11:59 AM
um, you can argue about this school vs. that school all you want. the most telling stat about the public school system in this city is that the on-time graduation rate is less than 50%. pathetic and scary.
http://tinyurl.com/c6dnh2
Posted by: benno at April 7, 2009 12:00 PM
lechacal is spot on here.
Posted by: bowl of dicks at April 7, 2009 12:00 PM
I wish luck to everyone who chooses NYC public schools for their children. I hope it works out for them. Unfortunately, I feel it is terrible system for a myriad of reasons already discussed (budgets, bureaucracy etc...). One thing that hasn't been discussed is the testing system. Great you move into a good school district to get a good elementary school, but by age 8 (3rd grade) they are testing to see if they can get into a good middle school (which more than likely they will need to commute to). Then they again need to test into a good high school (of which they are only a few) which more than likely they will need to commute a minimum of 30 minutes. All the while they never go to school with kids from their own neighborhood (after elementary school). And even then that isn't even always the case since so many families move after getting into a good school district. These reasons along with a host of others lead me to feel that NYC Public Schools are just not the way to go if you have the choice. I wish Brooklyn could become the utopia that all of you people not originally from NYC want it to be. Good luck.
Posted by: NewYawker at April 7, 2009 12:02 PM
lechacal - i agree with everything you have said so far - my children are average and i love them and i will spend my time and money giving them a good life, taking them on vacations and enrolling them in an extra curricula activites that they want to do.
i will not spend 50k a year on kindergarten!
Posted by: bkny at April 7, 2009 12:03 PM
sorry lechacal you can mock all you want - this is not a question necessarily of how much does a 1st grader "know" - its a question of how well a 1st grade can learn.
I dont know if you have children or have ever worked with them but trust me what kids "learn" (most not in school) from 0-9 MATTERS allot.
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 12:08 PM
newyawker - you are right to a certain extent but i grew up in nyc, went to public school. elementary near my house, commuted 30 mins to middle school and then commuted to high school. it was a great experience learning different neighborhoods, meeting new people and feeling very independent. not like in the burbs where your elementary, middle and high school are all across the street from each other and you are going to school with the same kids for 12 years.
Posted by: bkny at April 7, 2009 12:08 PM
I know I am spitting into the wind to ask people to speak about only what they have direct experience with, but I am SICK TO DEATH of childless people insisting that parents send their child to some random sucky public school to “improve” it. As a public school parent – and a very involved one at that – let me tell you that the sine qua non of any school success is the PRINCIPAL. A good principal’s efforts can be strengthened by an involved and committed parent body, but the best parents in the world cannot ameliorate the poisonous atmosphere that results from an uninvolved, pension-padding principal.
Montrose Morris, because you are usually a voice of reason, I feel particularly angry about your comments. The situation in NYC is not usually a choice among a spectrum of public schools, ranging from mediocre to “good.” Bad schools are BAD. My zoned public is filled with teachers who couldn’t land a decent job who SCREAM at their charges and spend a majority of each day getting squirmy, ill-fed and poorly rested children to stand in line. Academic curriculum is dominated by test training, and children scoring at grade level or above are ignored. Perhaps this is “good enough” for your children, but it’s not for most involved parents who can make a choice. It’s certainly not for me. If my zone school were my only option, I would home school or do what a lot of people will do: head for the suburbs and pay $25K in annual property taxes – a bargain for more than one child.
As for bedstuy11216’s comment about putting your kid into a promising school with an open administration, you bet that’s what parents do right now (not that you would know). That’s why Community Roots (D13), PS 8 (D15) and PS 10 (D15) are so hot. They are exactly that type of school. Your list of how to improve a school is really laughable and shows zero connection to the real world of NYC public schools.
Lechacal, I’m glad things worked out for you, but it doesn’t for most people in your situation. Pardon me for wanting a better and more straightforward path for my children, if not one strewn with roses.
To Mr. B’s original question: Some people definitely bought in poor school districts or zones assuming they could use the house price savings for private tuition. Now that this notion is, at the very least, up in the air, certain areas will suffer. Anything in District 13 (excepting the area with the good zone school) and parts of Boerum Hill (PSs 38 and 32) will definitely experience a decline in property values. I’m not as familiar with Park Slope, but any area with a poor zone school should see a bigger price discount as well.
Posted by: Brooklyn Chicken at April 7, 2009 12:11 PM
The hard thing about planning for school and kids is what I think many have already suggested here: that building a strong school environment requires involvement long before your children would start school if you want your kids to benefit (and not simply those who come after). That's hard to do -- it's asking people who may not even be sure they want to have kids to invest significant time and energy in a school district five or more years before they'd use it. It's probably the expectation we should have of ourselves as members of a community, but besides being a lot to ask of people, it seems like it could be organizationally problematic, too.
I think it's fair to say that five years ago before I had kids, I had different ideas of what was important to have in a school. I've never worked in education or with kids, so my education about kids, and the various ways they can be, and how they learn, has come with spending time with my kids and their friends. I can imagine parents of actual kids who were attending a local school not being too excited about hearing what the kid-less, planning-for-the-future parents had to say about the best way to run a school. If all this is about is raising money for a school, that would be one thing, but I don't think it's only about raising money.
Finally, the most intersting and impressive (to me) school I've seen so far was a charter school (a public school) that's gives preference to kids within a certain district -- and the directors there said the reason they were able to do many of the things that I found so appealing was because they had flexiblity not available to regular public schools. This suggests that we're asking people not only to become invested in their own public schools five or more years before they'd use them -- perhaps in ways that could raise the hackles of those with kids already in those schools -- but also to become advocates for changes to the educational system (at least prospective parents who like the same things I like in schools). Again, this may be what we should ask of members of a community, but it is asking a lot.
For my part, when I moved here many years ago, I thought a little about public school, but perhaps not as much as I should have. I was somewhat involved in the local school, but again not perhaps as much as I should have been. And now we're probably going to have to move and my kids are aproaching school age, and I am thinking very much about school district -- not as an alternative to private school, but now knowing my kids and knowing a little bit about what learning environments I think would be good for them, I have a better sense of what public schools I think would be a good fit for them and that will inform my family's move.
Posted by: slyone at April 7, 2009 12:13 PM
Despite the stereotype about Chinese kids, most of the kids at 130 have parents who work in sweatshops or Chinese restaurants and the kids are raised by grandparents who haven't left Chinatown since they got there. They listen to Mrs. Woo, the principal.
These kids are taught respect for authority (mostly) and that does help.
But it's really racist to think that you need a nonblack, nonhispanic majority to have a great school. You need a principal who knows how to rally the faculty and the parents and the kids. That may be a different person in Clinton Hill or Bed Stuy than in Chinatown, but whoever it is, it is a leader who knows what a good education looks like, has a genuine affection for the kids in the building, and is willing to work very, very hard. Part of the problem with raising up a school in a mostly-black or mostly-Latino neighborhood is that the parents went to shitty schools too and they don't necessarily know what makes a good school. A good principal will help with that.
My daughter attended Shuang Wen (the dual-language Mandarin-English school in District 1) for pre-k. I moved her to PS130 in central Chinatown because I thought the principal was stronger, and because I liked the district (2 versus 1) better.
Shuang Wen has a much wealthier, well-educated group of families than do the good Chinatown elementary schools (PS1, PS2, PS124, PS130).
PS126, which abuts the Lower-East-Side projects at the river end of Catherine St., has a huge number of project kids and a lot of recent immigrant (very poor, illegal, from Fujian Province) kids from China. It's another great school with a very strong principal. (I am familiar with this school because my daughter goes to the affiliated middle school.)
To the person who said middle school has better choices because kids can travel by themselves: just because the kids can travel does not mean that your kid can get in. There are many more seats in good elementary schools and good high schools than in good middle schools across the city. This is a particular problem in District 13.
Posted by: rf at April 7, 2009 12:14 PM
bkny, now see that that group of 100 white parents. That is probably the most cutthroat and ruthless group of people you will ever met. Every year its another 100 parents.
I just wish they organize themselves in the pursuit of Good. And not pursue the every parent for themselves, "ends justify the means" mentality that seems ever so prevalent.
As long as loopholes exist, these folks will find it and keep it to themselves until it is of no use to anyone else. The quicker these loopholes get closed the sooner we can go about repairing our schools.
Posted by: Colonel Steve Austin at April 7, 2009 12:14 PM
fsrw: go back to my first post - have two kids, might have three by dinnertime. Yes, what you learn during those years is very important, but it is what you learn from your parents that matters the most. "Academics" barely matter in comparison. Take it from a kid who went to some of the worst public schools in rural New England, dropped out of high school at 16 and now goes toe-to-toe on a daily basis with some of the best minds of his generation.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 12:15 PM
rf "and the kids are raised by grandparents who haven't left Chinatown since they got there."
and so? you do not have to leave a ghetto to appreciate education and instill its importance on your children (or grandchildren).
rf- "But it's really racist to think that you need a nonblack, nonhispanic majority to have a great school. You need a principal who knows how to rally the faculty and the parents and the kids."
Who thinks or said that?
- and parents and kids in "better schools" generally do not need "rally[ing]"
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 12:21 PM
lechacal - I think we agree as to what matters most....but you have to admit it is easier (for the parent - and maybe the kid) to at least have a significant population of like-minded (educationally aspiring) parents and kids around to reinforce the lesson [not essential but helpful -no?]
And btw (just curious) what 'best minds' are you battling with on a daily basis (and why are you fighting with them)
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 12:25 PM
Faithful - I think you and I talked about PS 261 on Brooklynian - feel free to PM me there if you want to talk about the politics of getting into PS 261.
The strum and drang in this thread is only somewhat illuminating in that it seems most of posters don't have children. Colonel Steve Austin (!) as I posted earlier many new residents of FG/CH have been making efforts with the local schools, particularly PS 20 and PS 11. What that seems to reveal is that parental involvement means nothing if it is not welcomed by the principal. Also different parents value different things - for some order and respect are more important than creativity and change (I think I am being unfair in even positing it that way).
I would also agree that elementary school seems more important to me than later schooling.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 12:25 PM
BKNY,
I hope you didn't get mugged several times and stabbed as I did growing up in NYC. It's a very competitive, challenging, diverse life for a child in NYC. It's what you want for your kids.
Posted by: NewYawker at April 7, 2009 12:27 PM
fsrq-
I have seen "funds and wherewithal" achieve miraculous things. Children can succeed despite the shortcomings of their immediate home environment. Community organizations, churches, other family members and SCHOOLS provide a safety net for the child who has the innate ability but maybe not the means or family support. That is what the American success story is supposed to be founded on, right? That the situation you are born into does not determine the heights you can achieve.
I am not some pie in the sky optimist removed from reality. I am very aware that some of these children have home situations ranging from not so good to heartbreaking. I am also aware of how much work is involved and how challenging an effort it is. But when the doors close, it is the schools turn to try and engage and nurture and support these children. And it is the community's obligation to support the school in its efforts (even if you don't have a school aged child). We can't catch every child, but it is in everyone’s best interest to try to bridge the gap and move a family forward.
OK… rant over for the day going back to work.
Posted by: bedstuy11216 at April 7, 2009 12:27 PM
not racist, statisticianist.
Posted by: jingle mail at April 7, 2009 12:32 PM
quote:
I am SICK TO DEATH of childless people insisting that parents send their child to some random sucky public school to “improve” it. As a public school parent
boo! no! hiss! you dont get a pass from us cuz our taxes go into those public schools, so of COURSE we want them to succeed. it's us too you know who have to deal with the little brats every day, and if they turn out rotten we have to deal with their crimes and mooching off the system.
so there im saying it! just because someone doesnt have kids doesnt mean they have no input on the public schools. society as a whole has to deal with your little crotchfruit, so we have just as much of a right to discuss school issues.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at April 7, 2009 12:32 PM
Thank you, Chicken. Childless people are in no position to comment. I'm also a public school parent (in District 13), and trying to improve a school with an entrenched principal and a largely immigrant or poor population is like banging your head against a wall. We all want what is best for our children, and I'm tired of people who don't even have kids expressing their totally ignorant opinions about public school education.
Posted by: Lesloaf at April 7, 2009 12:36 PM
bedstuy11216 - I am not saying that "funds and wherewithal" can not make ANY difference and you are right that we as a society can't simply write-off all those whose backgrounds could retard their potential - BUT - $ an effort SIMPLY CAN NOT completely make-up the 'gap' in the majority of children and therefore simply redirecting the huge sums spent on private schools into public schools along with some extra parental effort wont "solve" the issue and is unsustainable in the long run. People are ALWAYS going to be most loyal to their immediate family so you have to balance that impulse with societies overall responsibilities and aspirations.
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 12:37 PM
I'm working so I really dont have time even tho I'm really interested in this topic (used to teach, etc).
but prodigal son:
>>I'll be waiting for you to "have more time".
I'm curious where Carroll Gardens "immigrant population" comes from.<<
I dont' get the quotes around "have more time" (LOL!), but since this is quick:
There's a decent island immigrant population at PS58 (the native french speakers in that new dual-language program don't usually come from Paris!). A large-enough hispanic population (mostly mexico) to require an ESL program. Also has a CTT program which is helpful
Posted by: Ringo at April 7, 2009 12:41 PM
Putnam, can we talk about the parent involvement thing. I can't tell you how often I've heard the FG stroller set complain about the PS 20 principal. With the biggest complaint being that he doesn't let parents in the school. What public schools do? Do parent really expect to be able to drop in on their kids and watch them through an observation screen all day like they do at the Dillon Center?
The ironic thing is, I hear complaints from long time families of PS 20 about how the principal bends over backwards for these new white and mulatto students.
So basically, one man, is preventing dozens and dozens of families from enrolling their kids in PS 20. I find that absolutely amazing..
I thought the gentrifiers had more fight in them than that.
Posted by: Colonel Steve Austin at April 7, 2009 12:45 PM
I think Rob is completely right here. Childless people have an interest in the school system for two reasons. First, it affects the society we all live in. Second - we pay for it!
Every childless person has an interest in whether their tax dollars are spent on education or something in which they may have a more direct interest.
Posted by: etson at April 7, 2009 12:51 PM
erm....can I be the first to wish Lechacel the best of luck with number 3?
Posted by: the chicken at April 7, 2009 12:54 PM
lechacal -- Wishing your wife an easy labor. And warm wishes to you on this addition to your family.
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 12:55 PM
Thanks Chicken - not here yet, but hopefully soon!
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 12:55 PM
Beat me to it by a few seconds, chicken. ;) BTW, based on your zoned schools, I think we're neighbors.
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 12:56 PM
To clarify my child, nieces and nephews are all in public school. Pre-K, First grade, Second Grade, Third Grade and Seventh. One of my sisters is a first grade teacher in a public school. My Dad taught computer science for years.
I took my child out of private school after one year and took a chance on an up and coming public school. And yes the administration (i.e. the Prinicpal) has to be open to change if not your efforts will be frustrated to no end.
As a parent, you have to make the choices that make you comfortable. As long as I know my child is safe and happy I am willing to work with others to help make changes and improve the school for the better.
Posted by: bedstuy11216 at April 7, 2009 12:58 PM
Lechacal---good luck tonight (if tonight's the night). Will be sending you and your wife great thoughts and vibes.
Posted by: wasder at April 7, 2009 1:01 PM
really? We're at Dorchester and E19th so zoned for 139. Just outside of 217 but we got her in. Swaying towards 139 currently because of the excellent parent participation and general vibe.
Posted by: the chicken at April 7, 2009 1:02 PM
"I went through one of the worst public school systems in rural New England until I dropped out of high shool at 16 (never even got a GED), and now I am an accomplished lawyer."
You got a law degree without a high school diploma?
Posted by: East New York at April 7, 2009 1:09 PM
Look at you Rob. You're knocking it out of the park with your words of wisdom.
I second etson comment as well:
"I think Rob is completely right here. Childless people have an interest in the school system for two reasons. First, it affects the society we all live in. Second - we pay for it!
Every childless person has an interest in whether their tax dollars are spent on education or something in which they may have a more direct interest."
Posted by: TownhouseLady at April 7, 2009 1:09 PM
Pretty close -- we're on Ocean Parkway at the very edge of Kensington (literally, you cross the street and you're in another neighborhood). We're zoned for 217. A friend of mine has her daughter in kindergarten there and they really like it. My girl is 3 and in Montessori school for now (1/2-day preschool). I've heard terrific things about 139 and would definitely send my girl there if she got in. We've probably bumped into one another at the Tot Lot. :)
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 1:10 PM
Chicken -
Yes, that is the choice I would make. However, I would take the 217 gifted program over any other in DP, although I would also look into the other gifted program over in South Midwood (forget the school number) - this was the original gifted program that served the area. In th eold days it used to pipline kids into Hudde gifted and talented, but now a lot of kids in the nabe go to Bay or Twain if they get in (must have academics and past a very subjectiv "talent" test). Twain will get you the best academic results (i.e. HS), Bay is a click under in terms of academics, IMO, but is more nurturing Commute to Twain is really awful and takes forever - no subway. Must drive or fork out $2K per year for private bus. Very serious and competitive acadmic environment. Bay is much easier to get to - direct shot on the Q to Sheepshead Bay. Morrow and Midwood are decent HS choices in the area, and I would send my kids there if they didn't get into Stuy, Bard, Hunter, etc...
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 1:10 PM
While I take exception to the term "crotchfruit," as a parent I WELCOME the interest and participation of the entire community to make all of our schools great.
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 1:12 PM
ENY...If you can pass the bar exam in New York you can practice law, with or without a degree. Its the most difficult bar exam in the country for that very reason, if I'm not mistaken.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at April 7, 2009 1:12 PM
Great stuff - thanks again Archi!
Posted by: the chicken at April 7, 2009 1:15 PM
Thank you, rob! Everyone has a stake in the state of education in this city. I don't have kids- but i have nieces and nephews who I do care about and whether or not they get a good education. In fact I care whether or not every kid gets a good education and has a good life. I can afford to look at the whole system, not just the school my kids would go to- hey, I'm paying for it too.
Parents, principals, teachers and the city need to work together- and that's a fact. I'm sick of hearing parents say I have no right to an opinion, or I'm ignorant of the issues. I beg to differ. And if you don't want to hear my opinion, pay more taxes into the school system and advocate for a tax cut to those of us who are childless so we don't have to subsidize your parental choices.
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 1:16 PM
"ENY...If you can pass the bar exam in New York you can practice law, with or without a degree."
Well, I'll be damned. I didn't know that.
Posted by: East New York at April 7, 2009 1:17 PM
Lechachel -
You're offbase with respect to my daughter. She's inherited her father's linguistic gift (fluent in several languages), and is not only currently taking French, but also keeping up with Spanish on her own.
My son who takes Japanese privately adores it, and speaks it with others who are familiar with the language every chance he gets.
My other child, who is only offered Spanish in her less-than-impressive MS (Collaborative - math scores are cringe-worthy), could not give a rats ass. BTW this child went to 321, scored highly enough on state tests to apply to gifted programs, was rejected by all, and subsequently placed in her 5th choice District 15 school. She deserves so much more.
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 1:17 PM
My mom was a NYC public school teacher for 35 years starting in the South Bronx in the 70's and then Queens for the rest of her years. She taught the worst grades of all (6-8th grade)
My mom spent a lot of her time,energy and money towards her classes.
A few years ago(10), I am starting my new job here and the workmen comes to my office to put up my name on my door. He says, "are you XX"?
I say yes. We engage in small talk. He says - "you know, I had a teacher Ms. XX, man she was my favorite teacher, she was great". I said, oh, yeah whereabouts? He said JHS 10 in Astoria Queens. I froze - I said what years he said early 80's. I said that was my mother. I started to tear up b/c it was one of those life moments where it was so obvious my mom touched his life that 25 years later he felt the need to bring up a favorite teacher to a complete stranger.
Point is - it's not just about the parents, but so many many teachers work tirelessly and with so much love and care for these kids.
I beleive teachers are at the crux of all this - I mean kick ass teachers. Yes you need more involved parents - but many of today's kids whether they are poor/rich, black/white don't have super involved parents. And like other posters have said the actual administrations of these schools and districts spend most of their time lobbying for their own personal progress within the DOE.
Posted by: gemini10 at April 7, 2009 1:20 PM
Well said, bxgrl.
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 1:21 PM
beautiful story, gemini10. two of the women I admire most in life were and are schoolteachers. One was MM's mother- I still miss her. The second still teaches today in the public school system. If everyone were like her NYC would have the best public school system in the world.
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 1:24 PM
My heroes have always been English teachers, gemini10. What a great story. That's some legacy.
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 1:26 PM
Thanks wasder and haz! For now I'm just timing contractions and enjoying a day off of work (and bumming around brownstoner). I get to see the slope in the middle of a regular workday. Maybe Mrs. Jackal and I can walk around the slope with a camera and see if we can get any good pics for Mr. B.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 1:26 PM
This is a fantastic discussion, and very helpful! Wish I had something to add, but my son is just turning 2 next week and so I haven't any experience with any schools yet.
I have to say that just finding out info and trying to figure out which schools are zoned for which areas is in itself a very confusing and daunting task! The DoE website is not really the most user friendly, and the statistics about individual schools are very confusing. Maybe it's just me.
I'm taking lots of notes which will come in very handy in a couple of years! We are definitely taking school district into account for where we move, along with price and size of the apartment. Depending on where the rental market is at, it will remain to be seen if we will stay in our current neighborhood, move further out for more space, or even move to Manhattan if prices decline. It's a wait and see game here.
Best wishes to Mrs. Lechacal!
Posted by: ennuiater at April 7, 2009 1:30 PM
Childless people, like all members of a community and taxpayers everywhere, have a perfect right to comment on and be involved with public education. I never denied it, and furthermore I support it.
What I am sick of is the braying that parents send their children to a bad local school to "improve" it. Now, if YOU did that, you have a right to talk about it. Let's hear from all the parents who subjected their children to 5+ years of crappy schooling and feel happy about it! But mostly the people who advocate for this path do NOT have children. And, if you did have children, you wouldn't send your child to the closest crappy school you could find so you could "improve" it. Because, like most sensible people who have children, you would seek out decent alternatives.
Fortunately, in NYC there ARE decent alternatives, and their number has been growing yearly. And I do believe that these decent alternatives demonstrates to the crappy holdouts that there is another way -- that there MUST be another way.
Rob, I appreciate your iconoclastic sense of humor, but crotchfruit is a really unkind term. I can't imagine a lot of children read this blog, but, to borrow a phrase, children are people too. The least you can do is refrain from using hateful and disrespectful language about them.
Posted by: Brooklyn Chicken at April 7, 2009 1:31 PM
Lechacal, first and formost, I echo everyone else's well wishes for your wife and family. I wish her an easy delivery, and a healthy chacalette.
Brooklyn Chicken, I don't have kids. But I come from a family of educators, and I've been a teacher myself, albeit college aged kids. As Rob said, too, I pay taxes, and I live here, so education is important to me, nonetheless. I also live in neighborhoods where schools are underperforming, but also underfunded, and not high on anyone's priority list. I am perfectly aware that fixing any school is a difficult task, and I agree that the right principal is crucial to success,
However, I stand by my statements. If we write certain schools in certain neighborhoods, with certain populations off as "bad" or hopeless, then we condemn 99% of those kids to permanent entry level jobs, at best,if they can get those, large families on public assistance, and further generations of the underclass who have no hope of anything, other than what they are given, or can take. This is unacceptable to me, although it happens here, in other cities and states, and all over, it remains unacceptable, and needs to change.
I know this is the conundrum of American education, and can't be solved on a blog, but I feel that wherever possible, parents, teachers and administration need to work together, pool resources, put in time and energy, and make local schools work. For most people, there really aren't any other alternatives.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at April 7, 2009 1:32 PM
P-D, I pm'ed you on Brooklynian.
Posted by: faithful at April 7, 2009 1:32 PM
Colonel Austin:
I am really not interested in having this come down to the quality of the principal at PS 20. And I am not sure what conclusion I am meant to make from your challenge to the FG "stroller set" (most parents use strollers, btw!). On one hand you suggest that the parents are a bunch of pathetic whiners who can't let go of their children, and on the other you voice someone's (whose?) opinion that the principal bends over for white and mulato (you gotta be kidding - mulato?) kids. But I think your tone is a fair example of how poisonous the environment got there very quickly. We had bailed from that school for a whole bunch of reasons the year before the shit hit the fan. But I think what you have voiced is a legitimate interpretation of the struggles that went on there two years ago and confirms that schools are very political places, that parents have different views of what is important, and that parental involvement cannot trump a principal. When a strong principal opposes parents, legitimately or not, you just have to grab your ball (kid) and play somewhere else. And you see that in parents who have moved to another neighborhood school, PS 11.
I guess when parents complain about being physically barred from the school it is also a metaphor for institutional closure to change. At PS 261 where my son is now, we bring our children into the school, and on the last Friday of every month we are invited to participate in an hour of the teaching (be it reading, math, etc). When parents are battling each other over who has true right to a school, or battling self-involved faculty or a principal with a different vision, small moments like seeing your kids classmates each morning or observing how your child is learning can be lost.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 1:37 PM
ENY: Yes. Have to attend 4-year college to get into an ABA-accredited law school, but don't have to necessarily graduate from high school to attend a 4-year college.
DIBS: These days you have to graduate from an ABA-accredited law school to sit for the NY bar. California may still permit a wider audience to sit for the bar.
Architerrorist: That's fine. I don't know you or your family so I take what you say at face value. But I will note that many parents seem very focused on multilingualism as a goal for their childres when it is really just a goal for themselves. These parents often cite fluency in non-fluent children. It's one example of a broader set of behaviors involving parents imposing values on their kids and holding them out as a natural development (like parents who talked about how "into" Obama their pre-schoolers were last fall). It's entirely up to you to judge whether you are one of those parents.
If I had a dollar for every park slope parent who claimed that their kid who just learned how to say "hola me llamo..." was multilingual and international etc.... well, I'd have enough to buy myself lunch at Mr. Wonton.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 1:38 PM
Come on get a sense of humor - I have kids but - "crotchfruit" is a little funny - I mean we all know how they come to be; dont we?
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 1:39 PM
I don't advocate telling a parent where to send their child to school. I assume every parent wants the best for their kids. But claiming only childless people advocate that is a misstatement. Put your kids where you feel you should- but how about working for the whole system instead of only concentrating efforts in your kid's school. Parents are a huge and powerful group but I see them as fragmented and competing with each other now- that makes parents less effective as group overall.
Very few people want to hear from those of us without kids about education. They're content to take our tax dollars though. Well- if you buy something in a store, wouldn't you want the best value for your money? I feel that way about mine- I want the best school system for everyone. That's real value. That may mean a lot of hard choices for parents but as i said, if you don't want my opinion, give me a tax cut and have parents pay more taxes for schools.
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 1:39 PM
colenel austin
we are zoned for 20 and i wanted to have my child attend. I went on the tour 3 times. i tried to like the school. i went to sign up and waited for over an hour to be seen. After an hour of waiting i couldn't do it- and went to 11. I had no desire to fight the administration. Instead i wanted to be inspired by them. I don't expect the school to open the doors to people who want to observe- but instead to those who want to help. At 11 the sense is the more parent involvement the better- the more parents there are to help the teachers the more time the teacher has to focus on teaching.
so yes- a principal who doesn't want parents involved in the school isn't going to bring in parents that want to be involved.
Posted by: filmmer at April 7, 2009 1:40 PM
chicken, sorry. :( i always thought it was a term of enderment actually! and also i do get your point...
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at April 7, 2009 1:40 PM
Requirements for the NYS bar exam:
http://www.nybarexam.org/Eligible/Eligibility.htm
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 1:44 PM
Jackal....have a wonderful bouncing baby. I commented on the bar exam from something I heard heresay. i usually don't comment on anything that I'm not 100% sure of :)
All of you arguing: I have no children and pay taxes. Go where you want to go. It doesn't matter to me. Just thank me for paying my taxes. Full disclosure: I pay less than half the property taxes in Brooklyn that I did in Manhattan.
Thirdly, any of you arguing against rob have been PWNED today.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at April 7, 2009 1:44 PM
Lechacal - congrats and good luck
Bxgrl/I Haz - thanks - I wanted to share my story as I believe so many people out there treasure their former teachers...
Posted by: gemini10 at April 7, 2009 1:45 PM
"These days you have to graduate from an ABA-accredited law school to sit for the NY bar."
Lechacal given your dismissal of the benefits of an excellent elementary education - this has to burn you up.... I mean lets be honest here - A set of Emanuels and a 3mo Bar-Bari class is all you really need to pass the bar - or be a lawyer [seriously no sarcasm intended]
Posted by: fsrg at April 7, 2009 1:45 PM
lechacal- good luck with the new impending jacklet! (Boy- I hope your wife doesn't find out you're on b'stoner while she's in labor)
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 1:50 PM
Lechacel -
I actually would have preferred my daughter take Spanish - I took French (and German and Latin), and thought Spanish would be a far more useful choice in NYC. But it was her choice, and I'm glad she's had the opportunity to follow her heart. She's actually visiting Paris for the firt time as I type this (we're not wealthy, we just have air miles, and yes, we're lucky in many respects).
Last year, due to the economic crisis, my family was forced to move out of NYC. We had never thought for a minute that we would live elsewhere. I was willing to put up with MS issues and fight the system, give my time, make the effort, etc.. so that my kids could have the benefits of growing up in one of the greatest cities on earth. It never occurred to me to leave.
We now live in Northern Westchester, pay the school taxes (not much more than our NYC taxes, btw), and I have to admit, I am really shocked by the quality of the education my middle schooler is receiving. 14 kids in her ELA class. Kids have a wide choice of languages. Tons of after school programs, door-to-door transportation, fresh air, sunshine, etc... It's all wonderful, but I still feel that she's missing something, something I deeply wanted for her, as a child of Brooklyn - diversity, experience, sophistication, etc... Did I want it at the expense of her education? I don't know. Maybe I did. I didn't make the choice to leave NYC, it was made for me. Was it the right thing for my children - yes and no.
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 1:52 PM
"don't have to necessarily graduate from high school to attend a 4-year college."
OK, I get it. That makes sense.
Posted by: East New York at April 7, 2009 1:52 PM
i see a lot of comments responding to the argument that childless people aren't entitled to opinions on education. which is great, except that no one is making that argument. congratulations on beating up the straw man!
Posted by: z at April 7, 2009 1:56 PM
fsrq: I agree entirely. Why would that burn me up? You mean I must be annoyed by all the money I spent on law school when I could have spent $100 on bar prep materials and be the same lawyer I am now? The bar is a limited-entry cartel that enables its members to earn more money than they would in an open access system. I had to pay the entry fee to be entitled to my cut of the excess profits from the limited access system. Would we all be better off if we went to an open access system? Quite possibly. The current system churns out thousands of lawyers who are exceptional only for their parents' ability to continue to fund their education, and who could just as easily be administrators or claims adjusters. An open access system might attract brighter minds to the profession. To be pretty frank, I don't see lawyers as any more skilled than plumbers and electricians. We just happen to work with words instead of tools. It's not like we're doctors or anything... that's a profession that truly does require years of specialized education.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 1:58 PM
no straw man- go back and reread.
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 2:00 PM
bxgrl: Are you kidding? She's sitting right here getting the play-by-play and totally siding with everyone who thinks academics are key in first grade! We have to do something to pass time. (she really does disagree with me on a lot of this stuff)
Architerrorist: Sorry you had to move out of the city. That must have been a big adjustment. Best of luck to you and your family.
Posted by: lechacal at April 7, 2009 2:02 PM
Good luck to you and yours. We have a relatively large brood ourselves...
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 2:03 PM
Rob, apology accepted. Keep on sticking it the man.
Montrose, we are in agreement in principle, if not method. Although my children do not attend my zone school, I have let people there know that my fund-raising, grant-writing, and any other skills and energies are theirs for the asking. They don't ask. In fact, it's clear to me that they don't want. The children who attend that school deserve better than they get, as do all children. But it's unreasonable to ask me or other parents to throw our children on the pyre of social change. If I sent my children to that school, the only thing that would change is their attitude towards going to school.
Not all schools are so insular, of course. There certainly are low-scoring schools with struggling principals who could use and would welcome help from the community. Don't wait! Call your local school and ask what you can do. You can donate to the PTA, volunteer tutor (the Gowanus in Unity tutoring program in Boerum Hill is great), present to a class about your job or skills, or just read aloud. In the near future, it is reasonably certain that arts and after-school activities will fall under the budget ax. Many of us here are in a position to help cushion that blow. Start dialing!
Posted by: Brooklyn Chicken at April 7, 2009 2:12 PM
Additionally, if you're shooting for such, you won't get into a really good law firm if you don't go to a really good college and law school. But you could certainly hang your shingle and practice.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at April 7, 2009 2:17 PM
Oh, and while I'm at it, if you want to contribute to schools, DonorsChoose.org is a GREAT way to do it. It is a micro-grant search engine. Teachers or schools submit proposals for smallish things, like a magazine subscription or a digital camera, and some largish things, like large-format printers. You can search by location, subject, needed resource, poverty %, and cost, among other modifiers. I have personally purchased a year's worth of magazines for a classroom of autistic children, part of a digital camera, and a few other projects I can't remember. If you donate more than $100, DonorsChoose sends a camera to the benefitting class to take pictures of your gift in action. Then EVERY SINGLE KID writes you a thank you note. You get the whole thing in a big manilla envelope. It is immensely gratifying!
So, put your money where your mouth is. Quit insulting bxgirl and point your browser to DonorsChoose.
Posted by: Brooklyn Chicken at April 7, 2009 2:20 PM
What does "quit insulting bxgrl" mean? And I'll have you know I ve been donating to MFTA and Pencil for years. While paying my taxes for your kid's school. Maybe you need to quit insulting.
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 2:23 PM
Bxgrl, do you even know how much of your taxes goes toward subsidizing the school system as you put? And of that amount, do you think you should get back all of it? Or should some be put aside in the event that you, gasp, might have a child? What if you're sterile or gay, does that exempt you for subsidizing procreators? When does it end.
Posted by: Colonel Steve Austin at April 7, 2009 2:25 PM
CSA - i don't know if we are of the same generation but i was never robbed, mugged etc...i had a great experience traveling to school in bushwick! so i was not in the best areas at all!
Posted by: bkny at April 7, 2009 2:30 PM
Colonel said Mulatto!?! Mulatto, really, we're saying that now???
Sorry, major major pet peeve.
Back to intelligent discussion.
Posted by: Troy McClure at April 7, 2009 2:33 PM
IMO, a good safe school, with adequate supplies, an environment that encourages curiosity and makes learning tolerable if not fun is important, but nothing comes close to the importance of the right environment at home.
The most important factor is time, just spending time with your kid (not watching tv) is one of the best educational tools. My parents couldn't always take to me museums or educational events, but they read to me ALOT (edgar allen poe and tennison were my bedtime stories) and rescued art books from the trash. They never told me they were too busy to answer a question, even when they were. And they asked me lots of questions too. Essentially, they taught me to be interested in the world, which might be the most important factor in education after all.
Posted by: Troy McClure at April 7, 2009 2:41 PM
Oh gee, bxgirl, I meant other people should stop hurling insults at YOU. It's such a sport on this blog. I'm not much of a humor writer.
However I did just take my own medicine. I trotted over to DonorsChoose.org and donated enough for a middle school in Ft. Greene to purchase scissors (!) and rulers (!!) for a science classroom. If, unlike bxgirl, you have an unfulfilled desire to contribute to public education beyond your taxes, DonorsChoose.org might work for you.
Posted by: Brooklyn Chicken at April 7, 2009 2:46 PM
Colonel Steve Austin:
"sterile or gay does that exempt you from subsidizing procreators." First it was the mulatto crack, now the gays, "when does it end."
Earth to 6 million dollar man. Mulatto in 1854 New Orleans, maybe, in 2009 Brooklyn, no.
And gay people have children and complain about their schools endlessly on stupid websites (that would be me...)
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 2:56 PM
"The children who attend that school deserve better than they get, as do all children. But it's unreasonable to ask me or other parents to throw our children on the pyre of social change. If I sent my children to that school, the only thing that would change is their attitude towards going to school."
There's your real QOTD from Brooklyn Chicken.
I'll do what I can to support whatever school my kid goes to, but I'm certainly not going to send him into a bad situation as some type of social cannon fodder to help clean up the mess the parents, teachers, administrators, and kids who were there before he was born created.
Posted by: northsloperenter at April 7, 2009 2:58 PM
Architerrorist -- if you don't mind my asking, where did you relocate to? While my husband and I very much want to stay in NYC, we're slowly starting to consider moving elsewhere. I'm always interested to know where former New Yorkers landed.
Chicken -- thanks for the link to DonorsChoose.org. I'm heading there now to put my dollars where my mouth is.
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 3:05 PM
I am heading over to Donoroschoose.org now!
Wow - Mulatto - that's what my husband's grandmother was listed as on the 1910 census in Alabama
is that what we are calling mixed race people...still?
I guess better than half-breed I suppose
Posted by: gemini10 at April 7, 2009 3:16 PM
I know this is sacrilege on this web site but if you want the best public school education you will have to leave Manhattan and Brooklyn and trek it over to Queens. Yes, Queens, specifically District 26 which encompasses Bayside, Little Neck and Douglaston. And before all you brownstone dwelling troglodytes tell me I'm crazy for suggesting you move to Queens, let me tell you that Queens is the most diverse neighborhood on the planet, has plenty of cultural treasures including the new Chinatown in Flushing, the new Met's stadium, Colleges, Historical sites, beautiful parks, historical victorian housing stock and you can walk around at night without the Glock. And you can still use mass transit; the Bayside stop on the LIRR or the 7 train to Main street.
Hipsters and poseurs need not apply. This one is aimed at the parents, you know who I'm talking about.
Posted by: Legion at April 7, 2009 3:17 PM
I remember when we were little we used to collect and bring Campbell's Soup labels into school. Campbell's would then donate items to the school like projects and the sort.
Does this still happen or am I just getting that old?
Posted by: TownhouseLady at April 7, 2009 3:24 PM
I haz TWO toilets -
We ended up in the northwest corner of Westchester, along the CT border. We didn't want something that felt very "suburban." It feels a bit more like the countryside up here, certainly a more rural feel than southern Westchester, northern NJ or Long Island. Our cost of living, however, is about the same as as what we experienced in Brooklyn. No cashing out for us, as we were limited by my husband's new commute to CT. Hell, we just felt lucky to sell our house when we did. A few weeks later and I fear my husband would still be making the 2 1/2 hour (each way) commute from Brookyn.
Since I have raised quite a few children in Brookyn and navigated the tricky public education system, I decided to post on this thread hoping that my research and experience might be useful to others out there. I was helped tremendously by other Brooklynites in this area over the years.
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 3:25 PM
No one is dissing Queens. There's a lot to be said for that borough, not least of all its schools.
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 3:26 PM
projects = projectors
Posted by: TownhouseLady at April 7, 2009 3:27 PM
Legion - am VERY familiar with that area as I grew up in Northern Queens and in Port Washington.
Bayside,Little Neck and Douglaston lacks true diversity as you have little to no Black population there at all.
You have a lot of asian and maybe hispanic. So for me that's not a truly diverse area. Cardozo HS in Bayside from what I remember is HORRIBLE so is Bayside High. Not sure about the middle/elem schools.
Douglaston & Little Neck have wealthy enclaves and nice houses but you can only get into the city via LIRR or maybe private buslines - there is no subway service out there. You cannot get to the 7 line in any of the nabes you mentioned.
I would take living in Park Slope anyday than living over there - just my opinon though. There are certainly pretty streets,but Northern Blvd is sooo blahs-ville and parts of Bell Blvd aren't that great area in terms of the amenities you can get in Brooklyn. They do have some great Greek bakeries and cafes over there...
Posted by: gemini10 at April 7, 2009 3:33 PM
But Legion, what if we're hipster parents? We don't all live in Williamsburg yanno.
lol
Posted by: ennuiater at April 7, 2009 3:56 PM
Putnum, whats your problem. I'd tell you to take that pole out of your ass, but it seems you might mistake that as another poke at gays.
I own a home very near to PS 20 and have watched with a keen interest the going ons at PS 20.
The white and mulutto comment was something that I actually heard come out the mouth of one of the parents as they were discussing whatever drama was going on at the time.
I appreciate your delicate initial response. I'm very familiar with the competing forces at play and totally understand your decision to leave.
I'm a firm believer that a good school is a huge positive when it comes to real estate values. I see Park Slope parents paying through the nose to live in cramped one bedroom apartments, sleeping on pull out futons, sacrificing the bedroom to their kids, just so they can send their kids to a good school.
If the only thing standing in the way of a potentially good school is one man, how can he be taken out of the equation.
Posted by: Colonel Steve Austin at April 7, 2009 3:58 PM
if you rent and don't earn much money, your tax dollar contribution to the the schools is minimal. in fact, if you made one comment on here today, you have had more than your fair share of input for the year. thanks, nice doing business with you, crotchfruits.
Posted by: jingle mail at April 7, 2009 4:04 PM
my apologies, brooklyn chicken. I wasn't sure what you meant- could be either way. That's the difficulty with posts- hard to tell. That said, When I do have materials and such they schools can use I do donate. Don't have much money and presently unemployed so I do what i can.
Col. Austin- I in no way want my taxes back- I think good schools are for everyone's future. I was making a point that parents who think childless people should not give opinions on public schools (because supposedly we can never understand) are wrong. As a taxpayer and a New Yorker, I have a stake in this too.
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 4:06 PM
It looks like the big winner from this discussion is donorschoose.org. Will be heading there right after this.
As many people here have commented, the schools that have improved and turned around in recent years are the schools that got new, involved, progressive-minded principals. Sure, we'd all like to civic-mindedly help all the schools in our zone, district, borough, city, and world, but we're not likely to. School is a very local consideration, and if you're pouring time and money into your own child's school, you are not likely going to be doing the same for all the other schools around you. Just a fact. We've all only got so much time to go around. So yes, parents fight to improve their own child's school and it's survival of the pushiest/savviest/richest as it is in many things.
I am zoned for 20 but will be trying to have my child attend 11 next year. This is based on first hand observation from living in the neighborhood for 8 years and what I've heard of the experiences of others. Of course I'm going to choose a school with an open-minded, inclusive principal over one with a principal actively discouraging parental involvement. Not my kind of place. The question is if we can even get in to 11 by next year with all the success and popularity it is now enjoying.
Posted by: roomwithaview at April 7, 2009 4:12 PM
Thanks Architerrorist!
Posted by: I_haz_TWO_toilets at April 7, 2009 4:18 PM
great input jinglemail. Well thought and certainly a valuable contribution to the discussion. (yes- I was being sarcastic).
Posted by: bxgrl at April 7, 2009 4:18 PM
Sorry, two toilets - I mean North EAST corner of Westchester...
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 7, 2009 4:35 PM
Colonel - take a chill pill (and then help me get this pole out of my ass) - check the tone of your posts - I was trying to play with your own words. Sorry you took offense.
But now I understand that your primary complaint about the woosiness of parents in fleeing rather than getting the principal at PS 20 fired is motivated by your concern for property values in the neighborhood. Feel free then to volunteer at PS 20, donate money, or even if you think you can get it done, forward complaints to the DoE. But please don't denigrate the parents who attempted to create change there but failed as somehow lacking in gumption. The last thing they had on their mind was creating a better school so that you can charge more for your one-bedroom rental across the street.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at April 7, 2009 4:54 PM
I know families on my old block in Clinton Hill (zoned for the dreaded PS56) that bypassed PS11 a couple of blocks away to send their kids to PS20. 2 of these kids are in Stuyvesant now.
If I am not mistaken, PS20 was always a good school and served the kids in its catchment area and beyond whose families sent them there. Perhaps the newbies have a different idea of what is a good school, but if the principal changed his school to accommodate the new parents, what would that do to the families who were happy with the way it was?
It's been my observation that your average Clinton Hill/Prospect Heights/Crown Heights/Bed-Stuy African-American family has different values than your average white family in the same nabe. They can see what can happen if a school has no security (i.e., if parents have the run of the place) and if wild and crazy kids are not controlled. Their neighborhood school serves them well by being much more buttoned down than the newcomers would like. Maybe in a perfect world they'd like a looser environment in their kids' school but they know what the principal is dealing with and prefer safety and achievement.
This does not make them less concerned for their kids' education. It's just a different educational philosophy that has worked for them and perhaps the principal is standing up for the families that have sent their kids to his school for many, many years.
Posted by: rf at April 7, 2009 5:43 PM
My daughter went to PS261 when Smith Street had stores with no obvious source of business and there were men playing dominos all day/night (I actually liked that -- I always felt safe). There was a "new program" there -- with wonderful (mostly), committed teachers but it was by lottery. We were lucky (and made a non-refunadble downpayment at Packer as a back-up) that she got in.
That said, I cannot help thinking of what a woman (a child psycologiswt/teacher, I believe) at children's birthday party said to me 20 years ago. She said "She could learn in a box." Her view, with which I tend to agree, is that most children of educated, involved parents do not need the best school. It is the children with the least who do. So parents do not have to be so fearful of what they may consider to be less than ideal schools -- at least for K-5.
Posted by: BH76 at April 7, 2009 5:49 PM
rf, I agree with you, which my comment above about choosing 11 over 20 might not indicate. What makes a school "good" might be different to different people. Which is why some schools that are more "buttoned down" as you say and concentrate on test scores and a more traditional approach appeal to some parents, and schools embracing a more creative and progressive type of education seem to appeal to the "newcomers." At none of these types of schools (BNS, PS 11, PS 8, PS 261) have I seen kids or parents running wild or a loose environment - education and respect are highly valued, it's just that the educational goals and means may be different. The parents aren't running wild and running the school, they are welcomed to become involved in ways that help the schools function better (as classroom or lunchroom aides, field trip chaperones, fundraisers, etc.)
Posted by: roomwithaview at April 7, 2009 5:54 PM
I went to a wide variety of schools and sometimes the reputation of a "good" public school has little to do with the quality of the teaching and everything to do with the type of students.
I went to a sub-academic Christian junior high where we were taught evolution was a hoax, a private prep high school where all the teachers had master's degrees in the subjects they were teaching, and a public high school that supposedly is one of the best in the country -- with the insane house prices to match.
I learned the most at the private prep high school where all the teachers had master's degrees in their subject. New York private schools sound similar. But so do the famous magnet schools such as Stuyvesant and Hunter.
The education at the public school was a joke. Naturally the students scored high on SATs and went on to highly rated colleges because their parents were all professors and engineers with advanced degrees.
Lechacal, any advice for a brilliant friend of mine who wants to be a lawyer and doesn't have a college degree? Good luck with the birth.
Posted by: mopar at April 7, 2009 6:14 PM
Its all about involved parenting.
I went to some of the shittiest public schools on earth -- in England and in France -- but my parents were well read, involved in my schooling and made sure I did OK. They weren't super ambitious over the top modern parents either (this was the 70s), just regular working people who knew that public schools offer a great education if you know how to use it. I would send my kid to any public school wherever I happen to live. Its the same as everything else, we make society what it is by our action and involvement or by inaction and apathy.
Posted by: jamesdoran at April 7, 2009 6:15 PM
We left Park Slope about one and a half years ago for Hastings on Hudson, and miss Brooklyn a lot. However, our daughter, now a fifth grader, LOVES the Hastings schools. She had attended Berkley Carroll in K and 1, and the Children's School in grades 2 and 3, so she knows what she is talking about regarding Brooklyn's desirable private and public schools and she thinks that the Hastings schools are at least as nice as Berkley Carroll. Also, we just bypassed the whole middle school angst we would have had to go through in Brooklyn.
Posted by: formerly Brooklyn at April 7, 2009 7:19 PM
Wow, I only skimmed, but so far the key to good education is:
- involved parents at school
- involved parents at home (i.e. those books on the shelves!)
- good teachers
- a good principal
- money
- the other kids in class
Well, all of the above are important. I've taught in NYC public high schools since 2000. The above factors exist in different proportions for different children, schools, and neighborhoods. Sometimes an uncaring parent screws up the entire equation for their child. In the later years of high school, the kid has the ability to screw it up on their own. Individuals being what they are, with that pesky free will and all, there are only so many systemic cure-alls that can be proposed. They will all fail because not all individuals, especially kids, fit into preconceived boxes. When I hear some politician proposing a solution for education, I run! Joel Klein has done a lot to whip bad schools into (slightly) better shape, but I'm at a good school, and he's been horrible to us. We used to have over twenty elective courses in my department alone and had the budget to pay for them - not anymore, not anymore, not in this land of NCLB and standardized tests. I can't teach the two electives I put my heart and soul into designing - another reason why I'm quitting at the end of this year.
Posted by: sixyearsandcounting at April 7, 2009 8:38 PM
One reason I would consider a private school is that they have an earlier Kindergarten cutoff date - Aug 31 or Sept 1 seem to be a common date - as opposed to Dec.
I have 2 boys with October 1st birthdays. While not too close to the NYC public cutoff of Dec, they are on the young side. If I went private I would have no choice but to wait until the next year to send them, with the hope of them being a bit more mature for K.
Even if I did do this for their first year in K then had them back into public at 1st grade, I can't help if there might be problems, since redshirting is not allowed in NYC.
Now, if I moved to NJ, most towns in NJ have Oct 1 as their cutoff date and redshirting is very much the norm, especially for boys. If I held them back, they wouldn't be the oldest as everyone holds back their kids and not necessarily too very close to the cutoff.
But it's hard for me to wrap my head around making the move to NJ or any suburb. My husband is all for it, as he is getting a bit worn out from Brooklyn life. He didn't grow up here, but I did and it's a hard thing for me to decide. I've ben agonizing over this decision these many months about moving to Montclair (the only place I think I can do this), but I haven't yet pulled the trigger.
Posted by: HmmWhichNeighborhood at April 7, 2009 10:29 PM
Oh, and congratulations lechacal!
Posted by: HmmWhichNeighborhood at April 7, 2009 10:30 PM
I'm sorry to hear that, sixyears. I think when I met you I might have assumed you worked at a private school. What about this? What if all that matters is:
*Education level of parents
*Education level of teachers
Maybe "caring" and "good" has nothing to do with it. What do you think?
Posted by: mopar at April 8, 2009 12:02 AM
sixyears, you are quitting? Dang! Are you moving to a private school then or quitting the teaching game altogether?
Whichever it is, best of luck with the change.
Posted by: the chicken at April 8, 2009 4:24 AM
HmmWhichNeighborhood,
If you decide to move to the suburbs, expect a one to two-year adjustment period before you are comfortable. Once you have established a new circle of friends it will be ok. Montclair is nice, we considered it, but the commute to NJ didn't work as well for us as to Grand Central.
Posted by: formerly Brooklyn at April 8, 2009 7:56 AM
Thank you all for the well wishes - the little Jackal arrived last night, healthy and (as far as we can tell) happy. Funny story, and very much related to this thread - Mrs. Jackal's water broke as we were standing on the street looking at PS 282 and engaging in a very serious discussion as to whether we would be want the little Jackals attending the school (I say no problem, but she has reservations). I love where we live (in the 282 area) and don't want to exclude part of north slope just because it would mean sending the kids there.
Posted by: lechacal at April 8, 2009 8:13 AM
the first Brownstoner birth? Congratulations!
Posted by: the chicken at April 8, 2009 8:48 AM
Congrats on the new baby.
Chicken, Wasder also recently had a baby.
Posted by: mopar at April 8, 2009 9:03 AM
Formerly Brooklyn- We miss Brooklyn, as you do... But it's true, one thing that I have been reluctantly grateful to admit - is that the Bedford Central School District is head and shoulders above what public education could offer my children in thecity.
Posted by: Architerrorist at April 8, 2009 9:22 AM
Mopar, same here, both my husband and I also went to both private and "good" public schools in expensive towns and hated our experiences in the public schools. We chose to buy a (relatively) cheaper house in a bad school district exactly so we could afford private.
Congrats Lechecal!
Posted by: traditionalmod at April 8, 2009 4:35 PM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Le Barricou
added November 20, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Der Schwarze Kölner
added November 19, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Oak Wine Bar & Café
added November 18, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Mr. Wonton
added November 17, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Casa Rosa
added November 16, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Cousin John's Café & Bakery
added November 13, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Elote
added November 12, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Miracle Grill
added November 11, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Phoebe's Cafe
added November 10, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Ruthie's
added November 9, 2009 12:00 PM in Clinton Hill, Downtown Brooklyn
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.