How New York's 1% get kids into preschool...eye opening read... (Paris: 2013, houses)
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.
Agree that exclusive pre-k isn't anything new. Private schools such as Dalton, Marymount, Fieldston etc are see as setting children on the "right track" to succeed in life. Then there are those who also send their kids to good public schools in the city. Also, agree you can't buy your way into the admissions process with some private schools.
Or certain parents move out of the city to the affluent burbs like Greenwich, Rye, etc where they'll have more space for their children and think it's more financially wise than going the private school route and living in the city.
It depends on the school and the parents choices for their children. IMO I'd rather send my kids (whenever I decide to have them that is) to a great school district in the suburbs rather than jump through hoops with schools in the city. Many others here might choose to raise their children in the city.
Fair point, and well taken. Apologies for me trying to take the things I think are normal and best for a family and applying them broadly to everyone. I totally get the not wanting to commute argument. I am in the same boat, but differ in wanting to raise kids in NYC so am exploring other options.
But if you enjoy raising a family here and your children seemingly enjoy it, more power to you. Apologies for putting this down just b/c I may not neccessarily agree with it.
I just want to do whatever possible to minimize the possibility of seeing my kid at 20 years old rollerblading down 7th avenue in a manthong and pastis
No apologies required, we're all CD pals here together. Besides I like a good debate, keeps me on my toes! *LOL*
Just as with so many other things this "modern age" we live in has changed so many things.
It is safe to say parents and or parenting in the 2000's is not what it was in the 1970's or 1960's for the "one percent' or anyone else I should guess.
First of all as repeated stated money even bank/big money today is not just "old" but often quite modern and comes to persons that not only had little to middling before, but of all sorts and types as well. Long story short while there surely are some old school white/European members of the "one percent" that don't want their children around "blacks, Jews, and or gays" (as the old disco song goes), and decamp for the suburbs to raise their children in what they deem proper surroundings, there plenty who not only do not mind diversity but *want* their children to experience it growing up so some extent. It does not hurt that persons today have millions and billions of new money are a very mixed lot these days. Everything from gay hedge fund managers, to mixed race tech entrepreneurs. Take one of the most wealthiest men in the world, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. He is Jewish married to an Asian American, and supports all and sundry in terms of equality from LGBT to various races and or ethnic backgrounds. If and or when the Zuckerbergs have children do you think they will end up in some "old money" enclave of what is left of "old California" money?
Many of the one percent (or whatever you want to call them) want to live in Manhattan with their children for the same reasons everyone else does; the City is a rich and vibrant place on so many levels and they want themselves and children to be a part of it. You see this trend all over the United States from Boston to San Francisco, people (especially the upper classes) are moving back into cities and or remaining when they marry and or start a family.
To be fair know plenty of married couples with families both straight and gay that have moved out of NYC. Yes, they had money but they wanted other things that the City could not give and or felt it was better for the children. Not everyone can afford or even wants a townhouse at current prices. Spending tens of millions to live in such a residence in Harlem or below can get you a very nice property in parts of NJ, Westchester and or Long Island. Your kids will have a nice sized back and front yard and so forth.
Then get out of SI, and move to a suburb with better schools. I don't know where you work, but if it's in Manhattan, being in SI isn't buying you much in the way of convenience.
There's no place within the reasonable range of commuting where I'd prefer to live. When the time comes to leave, I'm leaving this region for good.
Well, it sounds like that admission to these top private schools are tightly controlled by the old school families. So do you think the situation described in this article exists among the NYC 1% or not? If there is an increasing need for more seats by the kids from the old school families, why would not they open up new branches or expand the school size to meeting the growing demand among themselves? Do these schools have fixed quota in terms of how many students they can feed into the Ivies?
I was looking at the matriculation stats of some of NYC private school and was impressed to see how many got into top colleges.
The Brearley School5224.2%31.9%73.5%27088.8%3302006-2010Saint Ann's School7912.6%24.2%54.4%17469.5%2352006-2010 The Spence School4813.8%28.9%64.9%22988.7%3062006-2010 Trinity School10716.7%39.0%68.5%24284.8%3112006-2010The Dalton School10911.7%30.9%59.8%20678.1%2722006-2010
Which begs the question are these students motivated and bright because they attended such schools or is it due to other factors such as their upbringing/family/surroundings?
This what so many that push quotas and or "diversity" and equality at what they consider elite schools often miss. Contrary to popular myth many of the "one percent" concentrate on their children's education with a laser like focus from day one. Persons who are themselves high achievers know already what it takes to succeed in this world. They also know it is best to start the way you mean to finish; that is you do not wait until middle school or high school age, wake up and suddenly stop slacking about.
Am not going to deny children from our better homes do not have economic advantages, but that alone goes but so far.
If we're talking Bloomberg like money, you buy them a new gym, and your kid gets in. Also, you likely have the social connections to get leverage.
Again, err, no.
When Dalton, Spence, Convent of the Sacred Heart, or whatever "elite" school wants to purchase a property, expand, modernize, etc... they first turn to parents and or family of current students for fund raising. Next will come alumni, finally others in such circles.
If your child is *NOT* currently enrolled am not saying a huge donation may or may not influence admission decisions but shouldn't bet on it. When such things are done it is made clear there is no quid pro quo. You'd be surprised at how many of the rich to extremely wealthy have their children turned down for spots in our elite private school system.
Once again you are *NOT* playing with naïfs here; these schools have histories going back decades of dealing families that come from fortunes of all sizes; from Standard Oil to men that basically own entire countries.
When Dalton, Spence, Convent of the Sacred Heart, or whatever "elite" school wants to purchase a property, expand, modernize, etc... they first turn to parents and or family of current students for fund raising. Next will come alumni, finally others in such circles.
If your child is *NOT* currently enrolled am not saying a huge donation may or may not influence admission decisions but shouldn't bet on it. When such things are done it is made clear there is no quid pro quo. You'd be surprised at how many of the rich to extremely wealthy have their children turned down for spots in our elite private school system.
Once again you are *NOT* playing with naïfs here; these schools have histories going back decades of dealing families that come from fortunes of all sizes; from Standard Oil to men that basically own entire countries.
So what do these 1% families do with their children not admitted into top tier private schools? Will they consider top public schools like andersson/hunter/, etc?
So what do these 1% families do with their children not admitted into top tier private schools? Will they consider top public schools like andersson/hunter/, etc?
Probably other private schools that are still good, just not the very best.
Which begs the question are these students motivated and bright because they attended such schools or is it due to other factors such as their upbringing/family/surroundings?
Schools and opportunities. So many, if not most, are vast overachievers. I met and worked with children from the most "troubled" (the official word) families in the projects who had zero education and far more actually going on.
As adults they are bitter and insecure for that reason - in spite of the wealth they usually inherit. Which initiates more series of problems.
Which begs the question are these students motivated and bright because they attended such schools or is it due to other factors such as their upbringing/family/surroundings?
This what so many that push quotas and or "diversity" and equality at what they consider elite schools often miss. Contrary to popular myth many of the "one percent" concentrate on their children's education with a laser like focus from day one. Persons who are themselves high achievers know already what it takes to succeed in this world. They also know it is best to start the way you mean to finish; that is you do not wait until middle school or high school age, wake up and suddenly stop slacking about.
Am not going to deny children from our better homes do not have economic advantages, but that alone goes but so far.
I have heard that it is not uncommon for the riches to send their children to Ivies through social network or simple financial support, which is probably easier to do than for the extremely small private pre ks. I know that a successful chinese business guy sent his daughter to cornell this way which is probably within his financial influence because he has no social connections compared to old money american families.
I tend to think that the above impressive matriculation stats of the few selected nyc private school is inevitabbly helped by the reputation of these schools and their longterm connections with top colleges which make their students on the short list of many top colleges. All else equal, a student from dalton will likely get picked by harvard vs a student from edison high achool in nj.
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.
