Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It would be helpful if the author had included 'charter' in the headline. If given the choice between a meh NYC public school and a charter, who wouldn't choose the charter?
It would be helpful if the author had included 'charter' in the headline. If given the choice between a meh NYC public school and a charter, who wouldn't choose the charter?
I don't think thats relevant. They were all opting to put their kids in private schools before.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
I don't think thats relevant. They were all opting to put their kids in private schools before.
A charter is not a private school, so it is relevant to the story. We're looking at families disregarding a community's unsavory reputation, a school's higher minority enrollment, and a much longer ride to school in search of a higher caliber of educational quality within a publicly-funded charter school. A charter school's funds come from the taxpayers, siphoning them away from the non charter public schools.
Even your linked post to the NYC page states that (non minority) families were once 'scared' to send their children to local public schools. The last line of the article you shared summed up the reason why parents of any color or rung on the economic ladder would choose the charter:
Quote:
“We believe that choice can be very effective in combating school segregation,” said executive director Dan Rubenstein. “Integrating schools is hard work that begins by creating a strong academic program — something all parents want.”
The OP was about bringing diversity to schools. The Bed-Stuy charter school article has parents who are unhappy (with their whiter public school) looking into superior alternatives, which are already utilized by their minority counterparts. The OP's article was about a school taking in a more diverse body of students who were not strong academically, and white parents resisting.
We have two schools. One very white and full of privileged people pushing back at the thought of poor, underscoring students of color joining them. (Wrong on many levels.) The other, very diverse and successful which white parents would prefer sending their children to over their under-performing, majority white school. (White people wanting to be a part of integrated schools.)
Don't we want children to strive to be their best and not judge others for their skin?
Pardon my ignorance, as I wasn't raised here. Why are there school districts in the first place? Why not first come first serve, or/and by merit?
The whole thing about school districts and how they drive home prices is so ridiculous to me.
It's about financing. Districts tax themselves to pay for their schools. Some are willing to pay more in taxes than others, ergo, some schools are 'better' than others. Money isn't the definitive reason for why some schools work and some don't, but it helps. States make up some of the funding for poorer districts to help them get up to par. Not everyone agrees this is the best way to finance schools but when change is discussed, inertia takes over and things stay the same.
My personal experience with NYC liberals is that they are the biggest hypocrites. I use to own a condo in gentrified hi rent area of Brooklyn (Dumbo), full of liberals. They rail about white privilege and claim to champion diversity, but when they zoned our elementary school to be with the neighboring Farragut housing projects instead of the more fancy Brooklyn Heights PS8, there was a massive uproar. They have no problems hiring the off the books Jamaican nanny and congratulate themselves on being so diverse (meanwhile it probably just cost too much to hire a white nanny). But god forbid their precious Aidan go to school with poor black project kids. Me, at least I'm honest about it and just moved to the suburbs.
A charter is not a private school, so it is relevant to the story. We're looking at families disregarding a community's unsavory reputation, a school's higher minority enrollment, and a much longer ride to school in search of a higher caliber of educational quality within a publicly-funded charter school. A charter school's funds come from the taxpayers, siphoning them away from the non charter public schools.
Even your linked post to the NYC page states that (non minority) families were once 'scared' to send their children to local public schools. The last line of the article you shared summed up the reason why parents of any color or rung on the economic ladder would choose the charter:
The OP was about bringing diversity to schools. The Bed-Stuy charter school article has parents who are unhappy (with their whiter public school) looking into superior alternatives, which are already utilized by their minority counterparts. The OP's article was about a school taking in a more diverse body of students who were not strong academically, and white parents resisting.
We have two schools. One very white and full of privileged people pushing back at the thought of poor, underscoring students of color joining them. (Wrong on many levels.) The other, very diverse and successful which white parents would prefer sending their children to over their under-performing, majority white school. (White people wanting to be a part of integrated schools.)
Don't we want children to strive to be their best and not judge others for their skin?
Given majority-minority NYC charter schools' results in English, math and graduation rates in NYC (some of them outperforming suburban districts, yet having majority low income black/Hispanic students) its the traditional failing-for-decades NYC public schools that are siphoning, not vice versa.
Originally Posted by OhBeeHave
A charter school's funds come from the taxpayers, siphoning them away from the non charter public schools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chint
Given majority-minority NYC charter schools' results in English, math and graduation rates in NYC (some of them outperforming suburban districts, yet having majority low income black/Hispanic students) its the traditional failing-for-decades NYC public schools that are siphoning, not vice versa.
Charter funds SIPHON tax money away from the public schools. It doesn't get much simpler than that. It has nothing to do with graduation rates, or performance on standardized testing.
If you wish to visit that aspect, you must keep in mind that charter schools are able to cherry pick their students whereas the public schools have no choice. If a student is a behavioral problem in a charter, the charter can kick him or her out. Public schools do not have that option.
Charter funds SIPHON tax money away from the public schools. It doesn't get much simpler than that. It has nothing to do with graduation rates, or performance on standardized testing.
If you wish to visit that aspect, you must keep in mind that charter schools are able to cherry pick their students whereas the public schools have no choice. If a student is a behavioral problem in a charter, the charter can kick him or her out. Public schools do not have that option.
No, traditional schools, which require pension constricts for which shortfalls are regularly picked up at the state level by the taxpayer - ie siphoning money away from, among other things, educating children, are the gas tank with the hole in the bottom. You use siphon as if its legitimate to use public money into ever-failing non-graduating traditional schools and not legitimate to send it to proven-successful models that aren't the crummy status-quo. Failing schools have no legitimate claim on that money - they are siphoning it away from proven success. So stop your hysteria. The money is being directed into education instead of a great black hole of warehousing and not graduating kids.
A number of studies now done show the "cherry-picking" myth is just that - yet people going on dogma and not peer-reviewed studies keep trotting it out. Its like the latest dumbass conspiracy theory that people latch on to. The only schools that cherry pick in the city are the SHS - ie traditional schools that select the cream of the crop by specialized entrance exam.
You keep repeating old union dogma to the deficit of the kids. There are thousands of black and Hispanic kids on waiting lists for Charter schools in NYC. The parents see the results, they see what is happening and they are increasingly not listening to your sort of lie. They know that entrenched status-quo special interests aren't kids interests. Their parent's honesty in their actions - voting with their feet - outweighs all the old flannel dogma. As for kicking out students - public schools can expel. Moreover, given the hundreds of millions of dollars spent in blatant lobbying since the 1960s by teachers unions in Albany - how come they never yet came up with a workable solution for separating troublemakers who sabotage every other kid's education in the classes they disrupt. That problem didn't merit attention? Black kids of course gotta stay in the crappy class that has failed them for the benefit of the one troublemaker? Thanks for your condescension that minority parents should just stick with the crappy failing-for-decades system you think is the legitimate heir to the money the public pays for education.
Its all BS anyway - the exact same crappy graduation and non-education was occurring in NYC even before Charters ever opened here. If anything, Charters have caused them to try to clean their crappy act up.
You're on the side that puts dogma above student's actual interests. The team that's been siphoning the truth for years.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
