Best place to live with Family (Lincoln Park..?) (Chicago, Evanston: home, neighborhoods)

[chet everett]

The only "mega disappointment" facing someone like the OP is that towns where one can walk to shops, restaurants, local watering holes, yoga studios, high quality schools, speedy transit and similar amenities favored by affluent parents are not understood by fools that have never ventured beyond the blocks they landed on inside costly parts of Chicago post college.

[King Harold]

The only kind of person who thinks someone from London is going to enjoy suburban Chicagoland is one who has spent too much time in "local watering holes."

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by King Harold

The only kind of person who thinks someone from London is going to enjoy suburban Chicagoland is one who has spent too much time in "local watering holes."

I don't think this is true. The kind of people who live in Lincoln Park are basically the same as the kind of people who live in Hinsdale. I don't see much of a difference, if any. If she was considering, say, Barrington compared to LP, I would agree there is somewhat of a difference.

Anywhere they move to in Chicagoland will be very different than London. Whether it's better or worse is completely subjective; it's only clear it will be different.

[King Harold]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

The kind of people who live in Lincoln Park are basically the same as the kind of people who live in Hinsdale.

I agree. That is what I was getting at in my 2nd to last comment. I should have been more clear.

[emathias]

The former CEO of the company I work for is German, with a German wife and two kids around 8 years old or so. I don't know exactly, but he was probably paid in the range your husband is expecting.

They live in East Lakeview, not far from the lakefront and seem to enjoy it quite a bit. If you lived in the Nettelhorst elementary school area, that's a great public (in the American sense) elementary school.

[jdiddy]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

If you see absolutely no difference between CPS and New Trier Schools, then you certainly have a unique perspective.

Most people would agree that CPS has far worse financial problems, is far more likely to go on strike, and has various ills not present in suburban school districts. These issues are relevant for all CPS schools, even the few higher performing ones.

If CPS goes on strike or goes bankrupt or massively increases class sizes or fires hundreds of teachers, then all schools are affected. These things won't happen in New Trier. So, yeah, even if your kid attends the best possible CPS school, you still might have your school shut down in an extended strike next year, you still might have 35 kids in a classroom, and you still might be putting your kids in a potentially chaotic situation.

An outsider should, at the least, be aware of the inherent risks with CPS. Doesn't mean it isn't an option, but let's be real about potential pitfalls.

NOLA, if what you took from my posts is that "There is absolutely no difference between CPS and New Trier schools", you are terrible at reading comprehension.

Obviously there are differences, I'm specifically discussing them. If you take 2 schools, one comprised nearly entirely of affluent families, and the other with 15% low income, the latter will have lower scores. But, isolate it on children with similar family/economic demographics (as the case with the OP), student performance is often indistinguishable.

To your other point, sure - there's obviously a higher chance of a strike this year in CPS, and its worth considering. I've voiced my frustration with CTU on here before. I was specifically pushing back on the inclination to advocate running away from a high performing public school because 15% low income and 6% english learners attend, despite meet/exceed % on ISAT test scores in the high 90s. In that case, the school has shown it can educate children effectively, and I can see value in exposing your children to a bit more diversity (economic, ethnicity, etc) than one gets in a homogenous suburban district.

Also, in terms of lifestyle, there is a big difference between the lifestyle the density of the North Side provides, and that of the little pockets of suburban downtowns with once an hour Metra service. Sure, the Hinsdales of Chicagoland have quaint little downtowns. But if you want to visit anything outside of that quaint little downtown, you aren't a short walk, Uber ride, high frequency train/bus ride away.

[chet everett]

There is a big gap in understanding being displayed by some posters who rather clearly do not have experience with CPS nor desirable public schools in nicer towns that ring Chicago, namely that "performance would be the same for the affluent kids". First this is NOT at all true as the data rather clearly shows there is are BIG issues that persist EVEN when accounting for things like family income. The fact is that kids from certain backgrounds are not doing as well as those from the traditional majority groups in ALL areas and some of the biggest gaps in performance are in the towns that specifically take steps to try to achieve balance. As I previously linked to articles there is FINALLY some realize from some of the school board members that it may make sense to spend resources to address these performance issues instead of simply spending money to have schools that have the appearance of more "balance".

The other major factor that directly addresses the OP's concerns about having a nice environment is that the constrained resources of even the most desirable CPS campuses means that there is SEVERE overcrowding and a subsequent mindset of "slashing" that really is quite different than in more desirable towns. The benefits of having SMALLER class sizes with MORE teachers available more better interaction are well understood by districts that have sufficient resources to deliver such things. While every public school in Illinois is facing more pressure becuase of the dysfunctional state budget process the better funded schools have sufficient reserves to ensure that there are more teachers in the critical kindergarten and early elementary grades so that all students are better prepared for the more challenging upper elementary / middle school material. Beyond the core academic subjects the better funded schools are able to also have nice programs in the visual and fine arts, music, foreign language and other subjects that do not show up directly on mandated standardized tests. In contrast the cash strapped CPS system that is cramming more kids into each classroom is not making any effort to offer any of the "extras" -- this is increasingly the BIGGEST differentiation driving even very open minded parents (that would seem to be more like the OP) to cross CPS off the list and focus on either very costly private schools or simply choosing a public school in nice area that has a tradition of more humanities focused public schools...

The sad reality is even schools like Nettlehorst that made national headlines with the dedication of parents and prior principals has largely succumbed to the more pervasive institutional dysfunction of CPS. Though not as dramatic as the conflicts at Blaine, the relative "specialness" of Nettlehorst has made it a target for both less than qualified teachers with union clout to get transferred there (which does nothing good for students...) as well as allow the central office cutbacks to be made up by generous donors / families (see comment upthread about how "fundraisers" at CPS often are covering basic supplies...

[jdiddy]

You should present the data then if that's the case.

[NOLA101]

Originally Posted by jdiddy

NOLA, if what you took from my posts is that "There is absolutely no difference between CPS and New Trier schools", you are terrible at reading comprehension.

Nope. I think I understood perfectly; you're just providing misleading statements.

You wrote "Any choice you make for your child is a social experiment, like it or not." Obviously your implication was that New Trier and CPS are (roughly analogous) social experiments in K-12 education. That obviously isn't true. One is full of chaos and dysfunction; the other runs with reliable precision. You put your kids in NT to avoid experimentation. It's the safe choice; the most blue-chip district in IL.

Originally Posted by jdiddy

Obviously there are differences, I'm specifically discussing them. If you take 2 schools, one comprised nearly entirely of affluent families, and the other with 15% low income, the latter will have lower scores. But, isolate it on children with similar family/economic demographics (as the case with the OP), student performance is often indistinguishable.

We all know this, and it has nothing to do with the discussion. Even in ghetto schools, children of affluent parents have basically the same performance as children of affluent parents in wealthy schools. Doesn't mean that most affluent parents will consider ghetto schools.

Originally Posted by jdiddy

To your other point, sure - there's obviously a higher chance of a strike this year in CPS, and its worth considering. I've voiced my frustration with CTU on here before. I was specifically pushing back on the inclination to advocate running away from a high performing public school because 15% low income and 6% english learners attend, despite meet/exceed % on ISAT test scores in the high 90s.

But that isn't CPS. CPS is very high poverty, very high ELL. There are maybe a half dozen schools that meet your stated demographics, while hundreds don't. It's extremely unlikely that a parent can rely on such an anomalous K-12 experience within CPS.

Originally Posted by jdiddy

Also, in terms of lifestyle, there is a big difference between the lifestyle the density of the North Side provides, and that of the little pockets of suburban downtowns with once an hour Metra service.

I think there's a tangible difference, but not a big one, at least not for affluent families.

The affluent pockets of Chicago with the good elementaries have basically the same people, and same shops/restaurants/amenities as in Hinsdale. Obviously Lincoln Park is more urban and transit oriented, but the households we're talking about all have cars and use them, and don't have radically different lifestyles as in Hinsdale. They're all doing the big box trek, they all have the nice SUVs shutting their kids everywhere, etc.

Lincoln Park isn't Manhattan, or even Brooklyn. Those mansions going up everywhere in LP would almost fit in Hinsdale. Those big box stores lining Clybourn are packed with SUV-riding soccer moms from LP, in a scene replicated throughout suburbia.

[King Harold]

This thread is a good intro to the OP of one of the more dismal aspects of American Exceptionalism.
To which overpriced suburb shall you move so your kid can be guaranteed a 36th place in the world education.