NYC Westchester School vs. NYC G&T / Privates (Scarsdale: real estate, rent)

[yongigutz]

We are a NYC-based family with two children (5 yo and toddler) who are looking to move to Lower Westchester for the schools. Our daughter went through the "fun" process of testing into the G&Ts and despite a 99% we had bad luck with the lottery and did not get accepted into a citywide. We are debating moving to Westchester for the better education / smaller class sizes or retesting her again for grade 1 as we are concerned she will be bored at school. She is currently at a private school which seems OK so far (too early to tell) but we don't know if we can continue it indefinitely due to the financial cost. (And frankly seems unfair that she'd go to a private school and her sibling cannot as we can't afford two private school tuitions).

For those who made the move, do you have a sense of how challenging the curriculum is at the top public schools (Scarsdale, Edgemont, Chappaqua, etc) vs. a NYC G&T program? I know they have smaller classrooms - do you see a lot of individualized attention to students with differing capabilities, and are they able to challenge advanced learners (for early readers, etc)? We'd prefer a district with strong academics but also a great music/art program as our daughter loves both, but don't know if places like Scarsdale/Edgemont are also known for their arts programs (vs. pure academics).

Would love people's opinions and if there are parents who used to have kids in elite privates or a G&T and pulled them out to move to the suburbs (and which schools you guys moved to).

Thanks!

[ltjbukem73]

i'm not sure if the curriculum is challenging, per se. but a lot more well-rounded, perhaps. i think a lot of parents enrich outside of school during afterschool or with private tutors. having only been in wc for a few months after moving from the city, that's what i can gather.

also, in nyc, i think there's an abnormal amount of test prep because everyone has to get good scores to get into middle school and high school. in the suburbs, you are guaranteed a spot at the MS and HS where you live, so this seems to be less of a focus in the schools. maybe some parents who have been here for years can confirm/deny my assumption.

our son's 2nd grade class has 17 kids and 2 teachers this year. last year, his 1st grade at success academy had 24 kids.

[ponytrekker]

This is where Westchester has its strong spot. One tax bill, send as many kids as you have. What I have heard is that almost all schools in Westchester are great for the middle 80% of the bell curve. Top and bottom of the curve may be able to do better with private or other.

For my kid, who is in that 80%, it was a superior education.

[outofbrooklyn]

Originally Posted by yongigutz

We are a NYC-based family with two children (5 yo and toddler) who are looking to move to Lower Westchester for the schools. Our daughter went through the "fun" process of testing into the G&Ts and despite a 99% we had bad luck with the lottery and did not get accepted into a citywide. We are debating moving to Westchester for the better education / smaller class sizes or retesting her again for grade 1 as we are concerned she will be bored at school. She is currently at a private school which seems OK so far (too early to tell) but we don't know if we can continue it indefinitely due to the financial cost. (And frankly seems unfair that she'd go to a private school and her sibling cannot as we can't afford two private school tuitions).

For those who made the move, do you have a sense of how challenging the curriculum is at the top public schools (Scarsdale, Edgemont, Chappaqua, etc) vs. a NYC G&T program? I know they have smaller classrooms - do you see a lot of individualized attention to students with differing capabilities, and are they able to challenge advanced learners (for early readers, etc)? We'd prefer a district with strong academics but also a great music/art program as our daughter loves both, but don't know if places like Scarsdale/Edgemont are also known for their arts programs (vs. pure academics).

Would love people's opinions and if there are parents who used to have kids in elite privates or a G&T and pulled them out to move to the suburbs (and which schools you guys moved to).

Thanks!

I believe the curriculum is the same across all the public schools, so the measure of how challenging it is depends on the quality of the teachers and the ability & aptitude of the child.

What you get at the top public schools is an environment where there are fewer ESL kids, their basic needs are met at home, parents are more involved, and kids get additional enrichment outside of school. This all leads to generally high standardized test scores. At the lower performing schools, some or all of the factors previously mentioned are flipped which therefore leads to generally lower standardized test scores.

[streetsmart]

Two things:

We lived in Scarsdale for a few years when my kids were small and weren't in school so I don't have first hand knowledge. However, it was widely reported that they didn't do any test prep whatsoever (other than the usual "this is how you fill in the bubbles" type of prep) because they said that through good teaching there should be no reason to cram with prep-style lessons. Everyone there considered the schools to be essentially private schools. The principal at Heathcote used to be the principal at Lower Lab PS 77 FWIW.

Not sure how to put this, but you won't be the only parent claiming a gifted child and wanting to know what the school is going to do about it. Everyone's child in Westchester is gifted don't you know? I'm only exaggerating a little, but that's the vibe from the parents so the schools really have to keep up. Your child won't be so special at of the top schools is what I'm trying to say.

[yongigutz]

Thanks for the feedback everyone! The more "well-rounded" education makes sense given less focus on test prep.

I don't believe my kid is genuinely "gifted" as I believe those kids who fit that definition are extraordinarily few. But she does show an aptitude for learning and we are looking for an environment where she will be appropriately challenged as teachers typically have to teach at the broadest level and often the kids at bottom/top do not get much attention (particularly if the class is large as they are in NYC). What I liked about the G&T is that for better or worse the kids who got in had the support of highly involved parents (and yes, let's admit, prepped them well) or are genuinely smart kids, and the curriculum is accelerated or enriched. What I'm curious about is if the environment is pretty much the same at a highly regarded suburb or better because of the smaller classrooms as teachers can differentiate as there are less students and often a TA in the lower classrooms. Or if there really is something better/more unique about a G&T environment.

[ltjbukem73]

depends on what you want. at the citywide g&t, because parents donate a lot of money, ie $1500 or $3000/year, they feel like they can talk down and condescend to the administration. whereas in westchester, parents don't need to fundraise since they are already paying a lot of real estate/school taxes. but i do find the westchester parents need to be spoon fed stuff where as the ny parents are a bit more self sustaining.

so if you find the former incorrigible, you may not want to stay in the 5 boros...you may want to head to the suburbs.

and btw, this is based on anecodatal proof..not just pulling this out of my backside.

[yongigutz]

Interesting. Can you give an example of spoon fed?

Funny, you are right on some of the attitudes of G&T parents. Saw discussion boards from a few at the citywide, and there are definitely a lot of "intense" parents. Although frankly, even our local public school has the same. Don't know if that's really a "NYC" thing or just people sick and tired of the BS they get from the DOE.

[entropywins]

I went to a top prep school in the city, and a Westchester elementary school, and have thought long and hard about what to do for my preschooler.

The top NYC-area prep schools and citywide public gifted schools will be a far better academic environment for a very high aptitude student, compared to a standard curriculum that has to teach to the median.

Slowing down a child who can work several grades above his/her age cohort can lead to behavioral problems, and the notion that teachers can "differentiate" by somehow addressing all different aptitudes in the same classroom, is frankly hogwash. The one-size-fits all approach to education is ludicrous, every student should be able to work at his/her own pace and to be stimulated and challenged with an education appropriate to his/her abilities.

A top WC public school may be well-funded but still has to teach to the median of the bell curve, will have no gifted/accelerated options until honors math class in 6th grade, and will have many special ed students mixed into the inclusive classrooms.

IMHO for high school, the top WC schools may well be a better value than a prep school if you are paying full sticker price and have more than one child. There will be just as many AP options. But prior to HS, not so much.

The citywide gifted schools are obviously a no-brainer. You get a private school education for free. WC would benefit from a countywide gifted school like Anderson, Stuyvesant, etc. One can dream.


On the other hand, Westchester is beautiful and safe, and backyards are nice. I may rent a place within city limits myself so my tot can take the G&T test, and apply for the prep school kindergartens as backup option #2, but as you mention, there simply aren't enough spots even for the kids who qualify, and if she winds up in option #3, WC public K-12, c'est la vie.

[nycparent2]

in my opinion:
citywide:
parents:
crazier (aka more tigerish on avg)
more diverse ($$ and poor are together)
kids:
more uniform (aka smarter on avg than burbs)
class:
bigger class size (minimal is 25 in k - and about 30 in upper grades)
pta always looking funding by parents
curriculum is faster (kids need to read/spell/write by K)


Top suburbs:
parents:
more lay back
more uniform on income (aka no poor people)
expects more hand holding - aka doesn't 'fight' the admin/doe
class:
smaller
kids - more diverse (in ability)
more layback, less focus on academics (maybe more on sports)

As for sampling size, I only know 1 family who move to suburbs from a citywide. major complains were about afterschool activities require driving. must have someone who drive the kids everywhere. they said academics were better (Jericho vs citywide) but less choice on after schools.