Andover: Tell me more! (Coon Rapids, Anoka: apartment, low crime, mortgage)

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

Depending on your definition of "embracing diversity", we may have finally figured this out. If one is exposed to diversity and doesn't like something they see yet still embraces it as a whole, that is acceptable. If one rejects diversity for its own sake, particularly if they have not critiqued it to begin with, I feel that there is a lack of curiosity within that person. What I am trying to say is that there is permissible latitude of thought within the umbrella of diversity...but no latitude when that thought steps out into the rain.
If your corollary were true, in my case, I wouldn't allow people to criticize me based on the premise that they weren't as intellectual or on the same level. I don't do this for two reasons. I can usually separate a person from an idea ( bar Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter) and I value the stimulation of an exchange of ideas. There are better ideas and worse ideas, but not better and worse people.

I think Clifford63 has a valid point. You judge people in a different way. As for your last paragraph; what??? I read it 4 times and I came up empty. It's just a bunch of dribble.

It's really simple: I don't "embrace" diversity. I respect diversity. You think I need to live within a level of poverty in order to be intellectual curious. HUH! Sorry, I don't want to because in the USA, poverty means problems (on average). I know why but it has nothing to do with this thread. Think entitlements.

You are philosophy some pseudo-enlightenment crap. It's really simple. I don't like crime and below average schools. I stay the Hell away from it. It is marching into pockets of Coon Rapids and that is why I am in Andover.

[Minnehahapolitan]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

I think Clifford63 has a valid point. You judge people in a different way. As for your last paragraph; what??? I read it 4 times and I came up empty. It's just a bunch of dribble.

It's really simple: I don't "embrace" diversity. I respect diversity. You think I need to live within a level of poverty in order to be intellectual curious. HUH! Sorry, I don't want to because in the USA, poverty means problems (on average). I know why but it has nothing to do with this thread. Think entitlements.

You are philosophy some pseudo-enlightenment crap. It's really simple. I don't like crime and below average schools. I stay the Hell away from it. It is marching into pockets of Coon Rapids and that is why I am in Andover.

Did you read the last paragraph as a response to Clifford63's second sentence?
You don't need to live in poverty to be curious, but going as so far as to snub people who are in a lower class than you goes further than it needs to.
Actually, the reasons for poverty have everything to do with this thread. The reasons that people give for poverty on forums on these are quite revealing. You think that the urban poor do nothing but sit on their ass and wait for handouts. Some do, alot of Fortune 500 CEOs do also. Most, however, are limited by the opportunities available to them. Alot is generational. Most is leftover from segregation and old social policies.
Everyone is scared of living near a Section 8 housing, but live in the biggest form of subsidized housing in America by taking the Mortgage Interest Tax-Deduction.

[Clifford63]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

Depending on your definition of "embracing diversity", we may have finally figured this out. If one is exposed to diversity and doesn't like something they see yet still embraces it as a whole, that is acceptable. If one rejects diversity for its own sake, particularly if they have not critiqued it to begin with, I feel that there is a lack of curiosity within that person. What I am trying to say is that there is permissible latitude of thought within the umbrella of diversity...but no latitude when that thought steps out into the rain.
If your corollary were true, in my case, I wouldn't allow people to criticize me based on the premise that they weren't as intellectual or on the same level. I don't do this for two reasons. I can usually separate a person from an idea ( bar Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter) and I value the stimulation of an exchange of ideas. There are better ideas and worse ideas, but not better and worse people.

People that live in the burbs do so for a wide variety of reasons. Some grew up there, some have family close by, some like a little more space, some like the feel of a smaller community, some end up there by chance, some want something different, some make the move to signify a success in life, some like the schools and yes some are elitists. Where a person lives says something about them, but it certianly does not tell the whole story.

What I am really saying is that you appear to be pushing broad generalizations about people of suburban mindset in the same vein you hear some people talk about Minneapolis being a crime ridden dangerous place full of entiltement consuming ghetto dwellers. Niether of these extremes views is close to reality, but they do have some elements of truth. I choose not to buy into the extreme views on either side.

[Camden Northsider]

As a person that often does generalize the 'burbs myself, I agree with some of what Clifford is saying in that there are many people in 'burbs that don't fit the common stereotypes - I have friends that grew up in dense urban environments and/or spent a good chunk of their adult lives in urban areas but have since chosen to move to places like Apple Valley. I myself have lived in suburban-ish areas by happenstance, and although I found a lot of people in them to be somewhat of a novelty I became friends with some surprisingly interesting people.

However, for my wife and I, we will never send our (future) kids to suburban schools. I tend to feel more at home and have more of a background in urban environments, whereas my wife comes from a very rural background. We both would much rather live in either an urban or rural environment and have our future kids attend school in one or the other (I would be very happy staying put in our current neighborhood, and I think my wife is up for it for a while at least, but she would like to go back to "the country" at some point in the future as well).

Here are my own reasonings for the above (re: schools) - they are, admittedly, based on a lot of generalizations and some of my own theories - however, from my own experience and formed opinions (living in and/or working in schools in all types of areas), these generalizations have often held true.

Urban: Kids grow up alongside a diversity of other students, exposed to differences in race, ethnicity, socioeconomics, religion, etc. from an early age. They have a large array of classes and subjects to choose from throughout their student careers, and many more cultural offerings available to them both inside and out of school. Volunteer and service learning opportunities abound. Additional bonus: College Admissions view success in diverse, urban environments much more favorably than the typical whitebread suburban norm, and grants/ scholarships are often much more available to kids in certain urban ZIP codes. Generalizations of urban schools based on personal experience: Kids, for the most part, aren't focused on what name brand they're wearing, what clique they're a part of, and are allowed to be themselves without fear of bullying/ teasing for being different from other students - difference rather is the norm (depending on the school's demographics). Teachers tend to be extroardinary and highly dedicated.

Rural: Very similar attributes to the above, with the exception (often times) of racial/ ethnic/ religious diversity, many classroom options and large amount of cultural offerings available. However, still exposed to differences (especially in socioeconomic status) and students are much less cliquey than in suburban environments. Everyone is expected to be involved in everything (otherwise there isn't a program) which lends itself very well to creating very well rounded and grounded student experiences, very high parent and community involvement. Bonus: rural experiences and success in school viewed favorably by college admissions (and grantmakers).

Suburban: Kids are exposed to very little diversity, be this in race, ethnicity, religion, socioeconomic status, or whatever else. The "culture" of many suburban communities can be borderline elitist at times and/or full of families that are very concerned about outward appearances and the perception of moving up, success, wealth, exclusivity, etc. Generalizations about schools/ student populations based on personal experience: As a result of the above, students learn negative behaviors from parents that translate to cliqueishness, snobbery, rudeness, etc. Along similar lines, because there is so little difference among student body and the student body is often very large, students find ways to pick apart and make fun of very small differences as a way to differentiate themselves from each other and/or seek to obtain a higher level of status within the student population. The culture of this environment, and resulting schools, do lend well to creating academic competitiveness among students, but the high pressure placed on students to continuously do better in academics, extra-curriculars, volunteer experiences, or whatever else can lead to student burnout and/or thrill-seeking behaviors, esp. in teens/ adolescents (I would also argue that the often seemingly artificial/ lifeless surroundings in neighborhoods play a part in this as well). College admissions at selective institutions are bombarded with applications from over-achieiving/ high-testing suburban students and thus tend to view this demographic a little less favorably and/or admit fewer of them per capita as a means to ensure a diverse student body.

[golfgal]

Camden--I know you said that you are making generalizations but I find your observations to be mostly false from my experience with schools in each of your demographic areas.

Urban schools, while they may be be more diverse, you don't see a lot of inter-racial mixing of groups while in the suburbs, which are much more diverse then you think, there are no dividing lines like you see in the city schools. You find all ranges of socioeconomic groups in the suburban schools as well. I also find that there is snobbery, clickiness and a keeping up with the Jones' mentality in every type of school. In fact, when we lived in rural MN you saw that MUCH more then you see it here. Your last name is VERY important in rural areas.

As for college admissions, they view success by MINORITIES in urban environments much more favorably, white kids still don't get any breaks compared to the rest of the state.

As for bullying in the urban schools-you have got to be kidding me-you do understand that at some schools kids are not allowed to wear certain clothing because of gang involvement, etc. You are MUCH more likely to get put down because of what you are wearing, how you are wearing it, etc. The kids in our kids' school don't give a rip what you are wearing, what kind of car you drive, what your address is. In our old rural community, that was all VERY important to a lot of kids.

I think it would be in your best interest to maybe go visit some suburban and rural schools and observe what happens in those schools compared to your urban schools. I think you will find your generalizations to be way off base.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by golfgal

Camden--I know you said that you are making generalizations but I find your observations to be mostly false from my experience with schools in each of your demographic areas.

Urban schools, while they may be be more diverse, you don't see a lot of inter-racial mixing of groups while in the suburbs, which are much more diverse then you think, there are no dividing lines like you see in the city schools. You find all ranges of socioeconomic groups in the suburban schools as well. I also find that there is snobbery, clickiness and a keeping up with the Jones' mentality in every type of school. In fact, when we lived in rural MN you saw that MUCH more then you see it here. Your last name is VERY important in rural areas.

As for college admissions, they view success by MINORITIES in urban environments much more favorably, white kids still don't get any breaks compared to the rest of the state.

As for bullying in the urban schools-you have got to be kidding me-you do understand that at some schools kids are not allowed to wear certain clothing because of gang involvement, etc. You are MUCH more likely to get put down because of what you are wearing, how you are wearing it, etc. The kids in our kids' school don't give a rip what you are wearing, what kind of car you drive, what your address is. In our old rural community, that was all VERY important to a lot of kids.

I think it would be in your best interest to maybe go visit some suburban and rural schools and observe what happens in those schools compared to your urban schools. I think you will find your generalizations to be way off base.

Admittedly, I focused solely on the pros of the types of school environments I liked (urban/ rural) and what I view as the cons of suburban schools (wrote that post in a hurry) - I wasn't intending to imply that kids don't get bullied or that there aren't positives/ negatives in all types of school environments. Obviously there are pros and cons to any type of district/ school, however, in my experience formerly attending schools in rural, suburban, and urban environments, as well as working as an adult in these various environments (and having lifelong teachers as parents that also have experience in a variety of settings) - of the 3, I have a preference for urban and/or rural schools.

Golfgal - I think Rosemount is probably somewhat of a special case - it is formerly a rural community with a long history of its own that has now become a suburban/ exurban community, so I think it probably has some characteristics of both (and you have to admit that the vibe in 196 is probably very different than in places like Edina, Minnetonka, Wayzata, etc.). There of course are always exceptions (some times a lot of exceptions) to the rule so I don't mean to say that I think my thoughts/ opinions apply universally, they're just trends I have noted in the past in my own personal experiences.

As for kids not being able to wear certain colors due to gang involvement, etc. - when I went to Sioux Falls Washington in the 90s we were not allowed to wear certain types of dress, colors, chains, and even backpacks were not allowed for a time (unless directly before or after school) due to various assumed threats that included 'gang involvement' - just because schools have these rules does not positively mean that certain things are a reality. At WHS, there did tend to be a fair amount of violence, fights, and tension between ethnic groups, but qualifying any of this as "gang involvement" was quite a stretch.

Oh, as to your argument that "white kids don't get any breaks compared to the rest of the state" - WRONG!! For generations an extremely disproportionate amount of white kids have been given preference over all of their peers as a result of being legacies or from a certain family.... there was never a time in this country where white students were barred by the law from attending state universities like black students once were, and because of persons like yourself crying "reverse racism", many schools have taken a step back from their affirmative action policies and as a result, a recent study found that this past year (I believe it was this past year, possibly 2007) was the first time in history that the # of minority persons enrolled in postsecondary education actually decreased in this country. And currently a high percentage of the minority students that do get "the breaks" in college admissions generally come from middle class, educated families and thus would have been able to get in to schools/ obtain scholarships without any 'breaks' anyways.

Oh, and I have a white friend that grew up on the parkway (thus his family was not hurting for money by any means) - because he went to Patrick Henry and lived in ZIP code 55412, he received a LOT of grant monies for college that he otherwise wouldn't have qualified for.

[golfgal]

You took my comment about white kids from the city schools not getting a break totally out of context--white kids from the city schools don't get an extra advantage for college enrollment compared to the white kids from the rest of the state. It has nothing to do with race, reverse discrimination, what have you, simply that a successful minority from an underperforming school will have a better chance to get into a university vs a white kid from an underperforming school.

[Kebinminn]

I like Andover, my parents moved up there.

I think it all depends on what you want. I live in Robbinsdale, it's a nice town, but I would be happy more suburban too. As far as diversity goes I'm friends with several other white women my age that have one kid the same age. We are a moderate conservative, borderline socialist, religious conservative and moderate liberal. You look at us and you may see more of the same, you talk to us and you get diversity. I believe politics shows a lot about the differences in how people think, applying that standard Anoka would be more diverse than Uptown.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to be around people who are at a similar place in life as you, when someone comes here and tells about themselves people don't recommend a place where people are different, they recommend a place they'd fit. When someone says they're young, hip and artsy no one says go to Mound because it's not their kind of place. I'm married, have a kid. I want a place that I can enjoy and is good for my son, I don't understand why someone else cares what I decide is good for him.

I don't expect every place to suit my interests but I see nothing wrong with choosing a place that does.

[Boomerbiker]

My brother lives in Andover anad he is always complaining about the St Francis school district. Voters keep turning down ballot measures and schools are very short on funds.

Andover seems like a very LONG commute to the twin cities. If you like a semi-rural environment with lots of elbow room Andover is great! The closest town is called "Now Then" which includes a gas station, one restaurant and John Deere dealer.

[Minnehahapolitan]

Originally Posted by Boomerbiker

My brother lives in Andover anad he is always complaining about the St Francis school district. Voters keep turning down ballot measures and schools are very short on funds.

Andover seems like a very LONG commute to the twin cities. If you like a semi-rural environment with lots of elbow room Andover is great! The closest town is called "Now Then" which includes a gas station, one restaurant and John Deere dealer.

Andover: Where the schools are so great you don't have to pay for them.