U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-26-2013, 01:11 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,985 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I really have to disagree with the bold. Of course graduation is a great way to measure success in school. While you can go to community college w/o graduating, you can't go to a regular four year college w/o a HS diploma or a GED.

I was not intending to say this school represented society overall. I am saying an area doesn't have to be wealthy to have decent schools. This school has 1/3 of its kids on free/reduced lunches., and an almost 40% minority population. I'm certain there are many other examples, including my own high school. I don't have time to look up the stats right now, but I know the district is among PA's districts that perform "Better than Expected" for SES.
Agree about the first point. But 1/3 kids on free/reduced lunch is nowhere near the levels many city schools face. Not going to look at other districts, but New York City's public schools average 78% free/reduced lunch. Even the magnet schools are rather high, 45-50%. A typical good Long Island school might be 15-20% [15% is the school district I went to].

Last edited by nei; 04-26-2013 at 01:43 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-26-2013, 01:14 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,985 posts, read 41,937,844 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
Interesting chart, but most of the growth has been in the 1%, few public schools have many of those unless you went to public school in somewhere like Scarsdale. One trend that has occured in recent years is income segregation, which has likely made schools in poor areas worse:

The Rise of Residential Segregation by Income | Pew Social & Demographic Trends
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 01:57 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,988 posts, read 102,554,590 times
Reputation: 33053
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavenWood View Post
I think he's trying to say HS graduation rates are only part of the puzzle. Past a certain point, (perhaps the 90% mark?) it means relatively little, marginally speaking.
Perhaps, but many city districts have less than a 50% graduation rate. I'm not at my regular computer right now, but I know I have posted links abou this in the past. Denver's latest pubished rate is ~48%, IIRC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Agree about the first point. But 1/3 kids on free/reduced lunch is nowhere near the levels many city schools face. Not going to look at other districts, but New York City's public schools average 78% free/reduced lunch. Even the magnet schools are rather high, 45-50%. A typical good Long Island school might be 15-20% [15% is the school district I went to].
You're right, but that's about what one might expect in a "solid middle class neighborhood" in the city as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 02:04 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,004,178 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Interesting chart, but most of the growth has been in the 1%, few public schools have many of those unless you went to public school in somewhere like Scarsdale. One trend that has occured in recent years is income segregation, which has likely made schools in poor areas worse:

The Rise of Residential Segregation by Income | Pew Social & Demographic Trends
That was the point.

When I use "wealthier," I don't mean the top percentages. I mean not poor. Both the charts I posted show just how skewed the distributions are, such that a 60th %ile family isn't well-off, and even the 80th %ile isn't amazing.

So, the middle isn't strong. But, a middle class that had more wealth and income, absolutely and relatively, could produce more successful students.

I believe that Katiana's point was that wealth isn't the only determinant of outcome. Sure, I agree, it's only part of it. But it's a BIG part. It might even be the biggest part. Tangentially, has anyone read Gladwell's Outliers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 02:11 PM
 
Location: Syracuse, New York
3,114 posts, read 2,524,394 times
Reputation: 2276
To me, it makes no sense for college educated youngsters who are attracted to cities that make an effort to attract the college educated crowd to suddenly head for the hills when they start having kids.

If they all stayed in place, the city schools would eventually be overflowing with the offspring of college educated parents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 02:12 PM
 
Location: North by Northwest
7,442 posts, read 9,877,128 times
Reputation: 4687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Perhaps, but many city districts have less than a 50% graduation rate. I'm not at my regular computer right now, but I know I have posted links abou this in the past. Denver's latest pubished rate is ~48%, IIRC.
I'm saying it correlates well until you get into the upper tail of the distribution. 50% is probably significantly different from 70% just as 70% is probably different from 90%, but 90%, 93%, and 96% HS graduation rates are probably not meaningfully different from each other, Aggregately speaking, whereas 80%, 83%, and 86% probably still see detectable marginal returns. It levels off somewhere. The point I'm trying to make is that HS graduation rates are probably closely clustered between the "good," "very good," and "excellent" open enrollment public HS's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 02:18 PM
 
Location: North by Northwest
7,442 posts, read 9,877,128 times
Reputation: 4687
Quote:
Originally Posted by SyraBrian View Post
To me, it makes no sense for college educated youngsters who are attracted to cities that make an effort to attract the college educated crowd to suddenly head for the hills when they start having kids.

If they all stayed in place, the city schools would eventually be overflowing with the offspring of college educated parents.
Like I said before, it's a collective action problem. Parents (understandably) are usually loathe to use their children as Guinea Pigs. It also really depends what kind of school we're talking about. Maybe I'd take a chance on a school like Greenfield, which is a K-8 in Center City Philadelphia. The test scores are somewhat lackluster, but the school facilities/amenities are good, while the classroom dynamics/parental involvement are indicative of a school on the rise. Compare that to (all too many) other Philly neighborhood K-8s, which are housed in (likely asbestos-ridden) buildings with overcrowded classrooms and tragically little in the way of things like pencils and paper, much less music or art programs. And that doesn't even get into the drugs/violence/gang involvement that permeates the upper grades.

It's also important to keep in mind that while the urban cores of cities are definitely becoming more popular with families, the suburbs are still a prime destination for families. I think most metro areas are going to settle into a "healthy balance" vis a vis urban/suburban quality. There are trade-offs to be made. I'm a college-educated youngster, and although I'm definitely enjoying living in the City now, even disregarding the public schools issue, the quiet, fresh air, and open space of the suburbs are probably where I'll want to be--albeit of the "charming," inner ring variety. Most of my HS friends want to settle back in the same area as well.

The whole of City-Data (though this sub-forum especially) skews so heavily urbanist, it can be easy to forget that the median American doesn't really think of (much less care about) these things. And I say this as someone who leans somewhat urbanist myself.

Last edited by ElijahAstin; 04-26-2013 at 02:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 02:30 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,988 posts, read 102,554,590 times
Reputation: 33053
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
I believe that Katiana's point was that wealth isn't the only determinant of outcome. Sure, I agree, it's only part of it. But it's a BIG part. It might even be the biggest part. Tangentially, has anyone read Gladwell's Outliers?
That's part of my point, also, that it doesn't take GREAT wealth to make a "good school". I'll be frank. I think some city schools use issues like poverty rates, English-language learners, etc as an excuse. Inner-city schools used to be the way out of poverty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavenWood View Post
I'm saying correlates well until you get into the upper tails of the distribution. 50% is probably significantly different from 70% just as 70% is probably different from 90%, but 90%, 93%, and 96% HS graduation rates are probably not meaningfully different from each other, Aggregately speaking, whereas 80%, 83%, and 86% probably still see detectable marginal returns. It levels off somewhere. The point I'm trying to make is that HS graduation rates are probably closely clustered between the "good," "very good," and "excellent" open enrollment public HS's.
Probably, but there's a huge difference between 93% and 48%. One is almost twice the other. All schools in Colorado are open-enrollment, space avaiable. Few OE at the poor schools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 02:31 PM
 
Location: North by Northwest
7,442 posts, read 9,877,128 times
Reputation: 4687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Probably, but there's a huge difference between 93% and 48%. One is almost twice the other. All schools in Colorado are open-enrollment, space avaiable. Few OE at the poor schools.
And I did not once imply there wasn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 03:24 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,004,178 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Inner-city schools used to be the way out of poverty.
I'll say that it's because, at the time, they were a way out of poverty and in to a burgeoning middle class. But, the middle class has become smaller and poorer, the bottom 40% only more so. And those with the means to do so have focused in pockets and at so-called good schools, leaving the rest of a city to be, generally, poorer and other schools to be intellectually deprived.

But the point I'm making, and is largely uncontroversial, is that there is a link between family well-off-ness (be it measured by wealth or by family income) and child outcome. In general, poorer children don't make as much money as adults vs. children from wealthier (wealthier by comparison, not just wealthy absolutely) families.

One might say "duh," but it suggests we need to bring the lower 3 quintiles up in wealth/income to effect changes in the quality of the students at any given school (not just the already good schools),
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top