Urban Studies: A Prescription for a Thriving City
The Christian Science Monitor has an interesting interview with Joel Kotkin, author of “The City: A Global History,” in which Kotkin prescribes a focus on basic middle-class amenities like schools and infrastructure rather than constructing extravagant cultural centers. We thought it was relevant given all the discussions surrounding stadiums in New York: To [Kotkin], attracting…
The Christian Science Monitor has an interesting interview with Joel Kotkin, author of “The City: A Global History,” in which Kotkin prescribes a focus on basic middle-class amenities like schools and infrastructure rather than constructing extravagant cultural centers. We thought it was relevant given all the discussions surrounding stadiums in New York:
To [Kotkin], attracting and keeping people in urban environments is less about projecting an image of “cool” and more about providing the basics that encourage and support a strong middle class: jobs, schools, churches…”No urban civilization has flourished long without middle-class families,” he says in a recent interview in New York.
He also goes on to worry about “ephemeral cities” (often marked by expensive, small apartments) which appeal to the single and the young who then leave when it’s time to settle down. Sound like a certain borough to anyone?
Secret to a Thriving City [Christian Science Monitor]
It is absolutely overwhelmingly an issue of class. Test scores, for instance, track tellingly close to income. (In its annual reports for each school, the Board of Ed breaks down test performance by different factors, including low-income vs non-low-income.) But race also plays in. There is an elementary school in the north (District 13) end of Park Slope that has such a good reputation among middle-class African Americans, they send their kids there from all over Brooklyn. The white families actually zoned for it avoid it like the plague.
Incidentally, to call PS 321 “middle-class” would be laughable. There may be middle-class students there, but if you want to know the class of most of those attending, read the real estate classifieds.
The dirty little secret of New York (and much of America) today is that “good schools” is pretty much a code for “no blacks.” P.S. 321 is 67% white/Asian, while P.S. 39 is 34% white/Asian. Calling it an issue of race would be misleading, though, as it is overwhelmingly an issue of class (but not entirely, of course.) Middle class families LOVE homogeneity, they NEED homogeneity and if they don’t find it in the cities, the will move to suburbia.
Think what you would prefer more – an aggressively homogenized Brooklyn, with schools strictly zoned by neighborhood, making damn sure no public housing students ever mix with middle income students.. or allow diversity to flourish and lose the middle class?
I’m willing to accept his premise to a degree but he really ends up looking like a jackass with this comment: “[Cleveland] did the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, they built lofts, they created this kind of new and improved downtown … [and] what’s the result? Poorest city in America, highest percentage of poverty in the country.”
That’s the _result_ of lofts and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?
I hate overreach.
your point is well taken- the school in my nabe is making strides forward but it would require my girl to be a bit of a guinea pig. but i do completely see your point- nothing will change unless people change it- i guess i just expect the city to do it’s part so it isn’t such a long row to hoe to get there- should we really have to sacrifice our children’s education to make strides forward- doesn’t the city look at these schools and think wow maybe we should invest some money here? how did ps 321 get so great and was ps 39 always a relatively good school or did the parents make that happen?
I believe from recent articles that SanFran, Portland, OR and Seattle are cities where population of children is declining and but are very
popular with affluent childless.
I don’t think anything I’ve read that NYC fits this descript. (all it may to some ‘hoods over others but thankfully NYC isn’t limited to just Manhattan – no matter what NYTimes, New York mag and plenty of others might think). And if anything I read about recent real estate trends here (at least amongst the higher end of middle class) is larger apts. for raising families (whether they use or don’t use public schools will differ by income and neighborhood public schools).
By the way, just to be clear — I’m not saying every parent should send their kids to public school no matter where or in what circumstances. There are plenty of NYC public schools I’d never send my kids to no matter what my idealism.
Sorry if this seems nosy but what neighborhood and school are you talking about? (1) I’m curious what level of quality you’re talking about when you say it necessitates going to a private school and (2) I wonder if it’s possible to improve neighborhood schools when all neighbors of means opt out of them.
I’m not trying to start a fight here. I have kids, I know there’s a vicious cycle involved, I know it’s unfair to expect people to make their own kids into guinea pigs. On the other hand it’s probably not reasonable for parents who can seek out and afford private schoool — the kind of involved parents schools need to improve — to say “make my school great, and then I’ll start sending my kids there.”
I live in Park Slope and am zoned for P.S. 39, where I plan to send my kids, one starting next year. Charming, small elementary school, reasonably good test scores, know parents of kids there who like it a lot. But I also know plenty of parents who decide out of hand that they’d never send their kids there because it’s not the vaunted PS 321.
So you have parents of means either opting out into private schools, or moving into the zone for 321 where — surprise! — the kids do very well, at least in part because they’re all the children of parents who can afford to live in 321. (To be coldly honest, if you drop out the scores of the lower-income students in PS 39 or other schools in the area, the remaining students’ performance is fairly comparable to those in 321.)
Again, I’m not jumping on you because I don’t know your circumstances, and I’m also all for better funding the schools — but I think there are steps needed that go beyond funding, and part of that is for parents who can opt out of public schools to at least try to opt in. If we all wait to be the last one to use the public schools after everyone else improves them for us, it will never happen.
oops , let me just point out that I am aware that many many people call brooklyn home already and raise families here, i am talking about the new homebuyers and breeders.
I view brooklyn as having the possibility on becoming the place of “this is where I live” for people- at least some homebuyers and people having kids feel that way- i do. but for instance, if it costs 1,000+ bucks a month to send your kid(s) to private school and property taxes go up over the years- it does occur to me that the cost of living in Brooklyn for “families” could be imroved greatly if I could walk my child to the public school in our zone- but i can’t because it isn’t a school i feel she would benefit from…(insert yuppie comments here) i agree with this guy- let’s get the basics funded and in place so people really can live in their communities- i know i am dreaming of some simple country life in the big city but i believe brooklyn is the urban suburban but i don’t think that has to be a bad thing- there are so many variables- and so many mistakes waiting to happen.