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.
Quick hits: Williamsville #1 for 10th straight year Clarence replaced by E. Aurora at #2. BPS (Buffalo Public Schools) dead last (97 out of 97)
My editorial take for potential relocation candidates: There are people on here who pound the drum about parents buying in the city and rolling the dice to get your child into one of the "magnet" BPS programs (which are highly respected schools in an otherwise terrible district) I would never even consider living in the city with school aged kids. Not for a second.
If you have school-age children, why gamble with lottery systems and admissions criteria in the city? The top 10 districts on the list all have affordable parts (yes even Williamsville/Clarence/OP) and no silly system where you're kid may end up in a school that looks like a demilitarized zone.
My thoughts on this area are if you're childless, and like the city, go for it. If you have kids and don't like to take risks with their education or pay outrageous private school costs, look at places in the excellent districts at the top of the list. Your taxes will be higher in the burbs than the city, naturally. Generally speaking, you get what you pay for.
Best of luck!
Quick hits: Williamsville #1 for 10th straight year Clarence replaced by E. Aurora at #2. BPS (Buffalo Public Schools) dead last (97 out of 97)
My editorial take for potential relocation candidates: There are people on here who pound the drum about parents buying in the city and rolling the dice to get your child into one of the "magnet" BPS programs (which are highly respected schools in an otherwise terrible district) I would never even consider living in the city with school aged kids. Not for a second.
If you have school-age children, why gamble with lottery systems and admissions criteria in the city? The top 10 districts on the list all have affordable parts (yes even Williamsville/Clarence/OP) and no silly system where you're kid may end up in a school that looks like a demilitarized zone.
My thoughts on this area are if you're childless, and like the city, go for it. If you have kids and don't like to take risks with their education or pay outrageous private school costs, look at places in the excellent districts at the top of the list. Your taxes will be higher in the burbs than the city, naturally. Generally speaking, you get what you pay for.
Best of luck!
The correlation between parental income and educational success for children is undeniable. City schools, with their concentrations of families at the lower end of the economic scale because of lower housing prices, will always suffer in comparison to the suburbs that have larger enclaves of much wealthier families. However, that does NOT mean that urban schools have to suck. Unfortunately, Buffalo's do, and the reason for that is that the BPS fosters inequality of opportunity to the nth degree. Some kids, those who get to go to City Honors starting in fifth grade or in ninth grade, get wonderful educations. Those who get to go to some overcrowded West Side elementary school and then Grover or Lafayette get much less.
Only in Buffalo do you find 1000 student elementary schools and 400 student high schools. Only in Buffalo do you find some students offered the opportunity to take advanced courses, even courses for college credit, and others not, based solely on the high school they attend. The BPS uses an out-dated and discredited educational model based on the premise that only the brightest (and in Buffalo's case, most politically connected) students go to college and the rest don't matter much. There's a reason that few other public school districts in the US use the selective high school/general high school/vocational high school model. Maybe these worked in the 1950s but we're a long way from then.
Buffalo needs to blow up its school organizational chart and start from scratch. It needs to decide whether it's going to use the elementary/middle school/high school or the elementary/junior high/high school model. Then it needs to draw sane attendance districts so that elementary schools are in the 300-500 student range, middle or junior high schools are in the 400-800 student range, and the high schools are between 1000 and 1500. That's a lot more but smaller elementary schools and a lot fewer but larger high schools, which is how successful school districts are organized.
Furthermore, all high schools should have similar course offerings for the most talented students, including honors programs, arts programs, and the opportunity to earn college credit while in high school. Centralized vocational centers should be reserved for juniors and seniors, much as the BOCES vocational programs work. Access to these programs should be based on what students do in high school, NOT in 4th grade or 8th grade or whom their parents are or know.
See here's the thing. I don't entirely disagree with what you say but....
1) Is your second paragraph the justification for the statement, "However, that does NOT mean that urban schools have to suck. Unfortunately, Buffalo's do, and the reason for that is that the BPS fosters inequality of opportunity to the nth degree."? If not, please clarify. Incidentally, not every student in a non-urban district is necessarily eligible to take advanced coursework simply because they want to. Sometimes a qualifying test is given, or enrollment is based on tracking. What occurs in Buffalo is happening on a district-wide level versus a school-wide level. Not saying it's right in either case, but that occurs outside of Buffalo too.
2) I don't know that the model for a "successful" district is necessarily the best model for Buffalo. Not disagreeing, but just making an observation.
Quote:
Furthermore, all high schools should have similar course offerings for the most talented students, including honors programs, arts programs, and the opportunity to earn college credit while in high school. Centralized vocational centers should be reserved for juniors and seniors, much as the BOCES vocational programs work. Access to these programs should be based on what students do in high school, NOT in 4th grade or 8th grade or whom their parents are or know.
I don't disagree with this at all, however, please clarify what you mean by "do" in high school.
I don't disagree with this at all, however, please clarify what you mean by "do" in high school.
I think Linda_D is quite clear. Every student should have access to the same programs and choose going into the one that fits them, and that is something many only know in the later part of HS. Parents should not determine what a kid "has to" do. They can guide, but shoving a kid into a program the kid doesn't have any desire to be in? One result: Kid will not work and succeed.
If you offer all students the same thing, even in just freshman year, and require them to pick a "major" so to speak in the rest of HS ( Honors, Voc Ed, BOCES, Arts, AP... etc), they will pick what they WANT to do and will - for the most part - succeed. Parents cannot do it for them.
You missed the point. The point Linda_D was trying to make was that Buffalo Schools suck because not every kid has an opportunity to succeed. I am not saying that this is necessarily incorrect. I am making the point, however, that this is not unique to Buffalo.
1) Suburban districts pre-screen kids based on family income which is a large predictor of "success" on standardized testing which is then later used to measure the "success" of schools and districts.
2) Tracking exists in suburban districts that also directs kids from doing "whatever" they want to do. Since most suburban districts are geographically and demographically smaller, that tracking takes place on a school wide level rather than a district wide level.
I do believe in neighborhood schools and every school a great school. However, there are budgetary constraints that, for instance, prevent the running of a higher level or specialized classes if enrollment isn't high enough. In suburban districts, they circumvent the problem because the enrollment is always high enough. In Buffalo, if only three kids wanted to take an "AP" class for instance, it is hard to argue to justify the resources for running a separate class (although I believe if kids are truly interested, there doesn't need to be a traditional class and it can be run as an independent study, but that would truly be a unique kid to pursue it.)
Finally, until we address wage inequity, we will never fix the problems with education, as credentialed education is the primary path to careers of wealth. Don't give me the BS about how we "need" plumbers, etc. The employment in steam-fitting and other trades has steadily declined as we out-sourced most of our manufacturing. The growth of the service industry and it's correspondingly low wages is a large part of the problem. We also use antiquated ways to measure student performance such as grades and the like.
When parents say they want the "best education" what they are really saying is that I want my kids to have better access to the higher paying jobs. Until you address that underlying inequity, the solutions in education are doomed to fail. If the "best education" didn't lead to higher paying jobs the picture of education would be quite different.
This is also part of the problem
Quote:
If you have school-age children, why gamble with lottery systems and admissions criteria in the city? The top 10 districts on the list all have affordable parts (yes even Williamsville/Clarence/OP) and no silly system where you're kid may end up in a school that looks like a demilitarized zone.
Because there are many nice parts of the city? Tell me what makes a school look like a "demilitarized zone"? I'm also interested to know which parts of "Clarence/Williamsville/OP" are affordable to low income families. Please post real-estate links.
Finally a note on the "economics" of the situation as multiple posters seem to be unconvinced that it is indeed do-able.
House in Buffalo
45K, 1.5K yearly tax. Suppose you buy that home to live in for 30 years.
Total payments to purchase house over thirty years, 73K. Total taxes 45K. Total cost - 188K.
Here's the cheapest comparable house in Clarence for instance
82K, 4K yearly tax.
Total payments to purchase house over thirty years, 135K. Total taxes over thirty years 120K. Total cost of ownership over thirty years. 255K. Add an additional annual cost of 2K for required automobile ownership over thirty years. Total cost 315K.
That's a differential of $127K. With two kids that's $60K each for private schools. That's actually plenty to afford decent private schools (if that's your wish).
While Clarence schools are "good" according to BizFirst there are private schools would be "better".
I'm principally the only one that beats the drum about living in Buffalo on this message board. Live wherever the heck you want, but don't use the BS of "good schools" to sell real estate and drive up property taxes to create exclusive communities. I live in Buffalo because I like it and it's good fit for me and my kids. We are in a nice safe neighborhood where they can bike around and to the park, etc., etc. My relatives live a few doors away and so we can pool resources and live quite comfortably. I also realize that this is not the best fit for everyone. However, I don't make false pretenses to sell my ideology.
You missed the point. The point Linda_D was trying to make was that Buffalo Schools suck because not every kid has an opportunity to succeed. I am not saying that this is necessarily incorrect. I am making the point, however, that this is not unique to Buffalo.
1) Suburban districts pre-screen kids based on family income which is a large predictor of "success" on standardized testing which is then later used to measure the "success" of schools and districts.
Genoobie, you need to get out more. This is NOT just about suburban vs urban. It's about almost all school districts in NYS organized one way -- suburban, rural, city -- and the BPS organized in a very different way that has NOT demonstrated any kind of success.
If you buy a home in most other school districts in NYS, your home is in an elementary school attendance district and a middle school attendance district. Your children will go to those unless you send them to private schools or they have special needs. When you children go to high school, they will attend the central high school like all the other kids in the district except those who go to private schools. It doesn't matter if you live in a trailer on the wrong side of the tracks or in a mansion or that you're a clerk at Walmart or the town supervisor, your kids will get opportunities based on their own merit and abilities, NOT on what they did when they were in fourth grade or how they did on a test in eighth grade! FYI most City Honors student enter the school in 5th grade, and students get into Hutch Tech via an entrance exam prior to their freshman year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by genoobie
2) Tracking exists in suburban districts that also directs kids from doing "whatever" they want to do. Since most suburban districts are geographically and demographically smaller, that tracking takes place on a school wide level rather than a district wide level.
I do believe in neighborhood schools and every school a great school. However, there are budgetary constraints that, for instance, prevent the running of a higher level or specialized classes if enrollment isn't high enough. In suburban districts, they circumvent the problem because the enrollment is always high enough. In Buffalo, if only three kids wanted to take an "AP" class for instance, it is hard to argue to justify the resources for running a separate class (although I believe if kids are truly interested, there doesn't need to be a traditional class and it can be run as an independent study, but that would truly be a unique kid to pursue it.)
Again, this is NOT a suburban-urban issue. You come down to the Southern Tier and you'll see poverty at least as bad as in Buffalo, especially in the rural districts. City school districts like Albany and Jamestown do NOT have young families fleeing the cities because the schools are so putrid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by genoobie
Finally, until we address wage inequity, we will never fix the problems with education, as credentialed education is the primary path to careers of wealth. Don't give me the BS about how we "need" plumbers, etc. The employment in steam-fitting and other trades has steadily declined as we out-sourced most of our manufacturing. The growth of the service industry and it's correspondingly low wages is a large part of the problem. We also use antiquated ways to measure student performance such as grades and the like.
What does this have to do with this topic? Again, this isn't something that is urban vs suburban but concerns education everywhere in the country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by genoobie
When parents say they want the "best education" what they are really saying is that I want my kids to have better access to the higher paying jobs. Until you address that underlying inequity, the solutions in education are doomed to fail. If the "best education" didn't lead to higher paying jobs the picture of education would be quite different.
This is also part of the problem
You keep wanting to frame the argument in terms of rich vs poor but that's NOT the issue. Other city school districts in NYS do a lot better than Buffalo does. Rural school districts also do a better job than Buffalo does, and many rural districts are just as poor if NOT poorer than Buffalo. If Buffalo was going against the current and showing even a modicum of success with that, that would be one thing, but there is absolutely no evidence of any success.
City Honors is NOT an example of Buffalo's "success" despite all the accolades given it. If you take the 100 brightest, most motivated kids in each high school class from Rochester or Syracuse or Albany, you'd get similar results. City Honors is what you get when you "super select" your student body, beginning in fifth grade. Nothing done at City Honors filters down to improve the educational experience of other Buffalo public school students. In fact, it's likely that the additional resources spent providing a "prep school" atmosphere for 800 selected students is detrimental to the thousands of other students who do without educational essentials too often.
Actually, you are dead WRONG about other city school districts in NYS doing better than Buffalo does. At Hutch Tech, given like for like (i.e. demographics / free & reduced lunch, etc.) the kids wallop every other school in any urban and some suburban areas in the STATE. These kids SAT scores are among the lowest quartile, so I don't really care that the kids took an exam to attend the school, I am saying given LIKE for LIKE, our kids fare far better than other similarly typed kids.
So Linda, why are there multiple districts in Cheektowaga? Seems to me if you can't afford a house in Maryvale, or in Lancaster, that PUTS you on the wrong side of the tracks. Sorry, we can't all be born wealthy and choose wherever we want to live. That's life I guess.
So you want to single out BPS. Fine. Let's play a little numbers game, Salamanca schools has a free-reduced lunch rate that is lower than the students at Hutch Tech for instance. So those kids are wealthier than their urban counterparts, but not by much (the rate at Hutch Tech is about near 60%, at Salamanca around 56%). However, the results at Hutch clobber those in Salamanca. So do tell, how is BPS doing a worse job with kids from less well-to-do backgrounds?
Linda, you keep making the claim of "better" but you have failed to define it. Districts outside of Buffalo do the same thing as Buffalo by having drawn "lines" of taxes, affordability and exclusivity.
If you want to define success as a numbers game, show me a poor rural district that has the same percentage free-reduced lunch and is getting FAR superior results on state testing, then I'll shut-up. OR define what you mean by "better".
But this is fundamentally flawed, for example:
Quote:
If you buy a home in most other school districts in NYS, your home is in an elementary school attendance district and a middle school attendance district. Your children will go to those unless you send them to private schools or they have special needs. When you children go to high school, they will attend the central high school like all the other kids in the district except those who go to private schools. It doesn't matter if you live in a trailer on the wrong side of the tracks or in a mansion or that you're a clerk at Walmart or the town supervisor, your kids will get opportunities based on their own merit and abilities, NOT on what they did when they were in fourth grade or how they did on a test in eighth grade!
But in wealthier districts, there is no "wrong side of the tracks" because the lowest house prices keep out the less wealthy. So then why don't you propose to the residents of Maryvale a merger with Cheektowaga Central?
School district boundaries are not determined by political boundaries except in the five or six largest cities in the state. Fact. Look it up. That a particular town is divided into multiple school districts or stretches across all or parts of multiple towns is irrelevant. The principle is that if you live in a district you attend that district's schools based on attendance districts, not some other means.
Hutch Tech requires students to pass an entrance exam. Salamanca Central requires students to be able to breathe.
FTR, central school districts were set up in NYS back in the late 1940s and early 1950s before there were "suburbs" as we think of them today. The districts were drawn up and voted on by locals, most of whom were people living and working in little towns or local farmers. The only developed "suburban" areas in the Buffalo area at that time were Ken-ton, Maryvale, and parts of West Seneca, which was considered "the back of beyond" where there were no municipal water and wouldn't be sewers for another twenty years.
Either way, you have multiple districts that have done a decent job of creating fairly homogeneous income brackets. Furthermore, the FREE AND REDUCED LUNCH RATE is more or less a measure of socioeconomic status. Not the only factor, but a primary one in determining educational outcomes as measured by standardized assessments. By that measure, Tech and Salamanca are ON PAR. Yet, the results at Tech far outweigh those in Salamanca. If we are going to use numbers to judge the success of a school then in this particular case, the BPS system wouldn't seem to be doing all that poorly, or "suck" as you like to say.
Additionally, find me some rural districts that have the 90% FRL rate as the poorest schools and you will find that their "success" rates are also poor with respect to graduation, etc.
Linda_D, I'm glad you like living where you live. The "good schools" mantra is a dead one. What makes a school "good" should be more than a measure with numbers but this is the system we presently have. So spare me the BPS sucking speech, because the whole system of measurement and school funding / exclusivity model SUCKS and that's not just BPS by the way.
Quote:
The principle is that if you live in a district you attend that district's schools based on attendance districts, not some other means.
So, de facto, you discriminate based on wealth of homebuyers and real estate values.
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.
Clarence replaced by E. Aurora at #2. BPS (Buffalo Public Schools) dead last 
(97 out of 97)
