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.
I don’t understand why public school quality isn’t the #1 metric. Ideally, you want a safe place with strong schools to raise a family. Bonus for services and activities and walkable is even better. The white collar professional enclaves in southern New England are like that. There’s a ton of it in NYC tri-state. Philly Main Line burbs. DC burbs.
To get that, you need fortress zoning and towns with autonomous schools. Places with strong county government usually don’t have the socioeconomic segregation to get to that level of gold plated public schools.
I agree that public school quality is significant in assessing the desirability of suburban areas. But excellent school performance can be found in locations with strong county government, such as east Cobb and north Fulton counties in metro Atlanta.
I'm not clear what such schools in our area are lacking compared to more narrowly exclusive communities in the Northeast - which are often the former locations of families with children who have moved to the Atlanta suburbs. If such families perceived our public schools as deficient, it wouldn't be logical to move here and send their kids to those schools, just to get warmer weather and a newer larger house.
Overall look and feel: Midwest
Scenery: New England, with PNW close second
Recreational Opportunities: Mountain West, PNW
Attractions: Florida
Shopping Options (think regional chains): Midwest
Dining Options (think regional chains): Piedmont
Architecture: New England, followed by Mountain West
Road Infrastructure: Florida
Public Transportation: Northeast
Urban Planning: California
Added...
Modern element: Mid Atlantic
Historical element: New England
I agree that public school quality is significant in assessing the desirability of suburban areas. But excellent school performance can be found in locations with strong county government, such as east Cobb and north Fulton counties in metro Atlanta.
I'm not clear what such schools in our area are lacking compared to more narrowly exclusive communities in the Northeast - which are often the former locations of families with children who have moved to the Atlanta suburbs. If such families perceived our public schools as deficient, it wouldn't be logical to move here and send their kids to those schools, just to get warmer weather and a newer larger house.
The difference is if you in Massachusetts the standard school is exceptional. In many of these sunbelt metros, there are exceptional school districts (sometime jsu school within a district) many of them filled with Yankees and 2nd generation students. From what I've seen a far higher % of all schools in NJ CT MA NH are going to be considered very good than in Metro ATL or Texas or in Florida or Georgia. But we are (or at least many of us are) fully aware there are excellent schools there. It's not as bad as many other states I don't want to insult here.
In MA for example many if not most people could probably name every town in the state that has a subpar (below national average NAEP scores) school district.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,550 posts, read 81,117,303 times
Reputation: 57750
Of these regions
New England
Northeast (NY/NJ/PA)
Mid Atlantic (MD/VA/DE)
Piedmont (NC/SC/GA/TN)
Florida
Deep South
Mid West
Great Plains
Texas
Mountain West (CO/UT)
Pacific Northwest
Southwest (AZ/NM/NV)
California
Which is the best in the following categories? Remember, this is judging the suburbs and not core cities.
Overall look and feel: Pacific Northwest
Scenery: Pacific Northwest
Recreational Opportunities: California
Attractions: Florida
Shopping Options (think regional chains):
Dining Options (think regional chains): New England
Architecture: New England
Road Infrastructure: Northeast
Public Transportation: New England
Urban Planning: Probably another country
and any other category you might think of.[/quote]
The difference is if you in Massachusetts the standard school is exceptional. In many of these sunbelt metros, there are exceptional school districts (sometime jsu school within a district) many of them filled with Yankees and 2nd generation students. From what I've seen a far higher % of all schools in NJ CT MA NH are going to be considered very good than in Metro ATL or Texas or in Florida or Georgia. But we are (or at least many of us are) fully aware there are excellent schools there. It's not as bad as many other states I don't want to insult here.
In MA for example many if not most people could probably name every town in the state that has a subpar (below national average NAEP scores) school district.
And frankly this is true throughout the Northeast. New Jersey has wonderful schools top to bottom, and a student in a lower performing NJ district will be near the level of high performing districts in suburban Florida or Texas or whatever. You don't have to move to a socioeconomically segregated burg in New Jersey or Connecticut or Massachusetts to get a good education for your kids. You just have to move to those states (which people do for precisely this reason). The socioeconomic and ethnic segregation is a Midwestern thing, especially in old money rust belt metross like Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Cincinnati, and to a lesser extent Chicago and Detroit.
And frankly this is true throughout the Northeast. New Jersey has wonderful schools top to bottom, and a student in a lower performing NJ district will be near the level of high performing districts in suburban Florida or Texas or whatever. You don't have to move to a socioeconomically segregated burg in New Jersey or Connecticut or Massachusetts to get a good education for your kids. You just have to move to those states (which people do for precisely this reason). The socioeconomic and ethnic segregation is a Midwestern thing, especially in old money rust belt metross like Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Cincinnati, and to a lesser extent Chicago and Detroit.
People say that but i don't think it's true. Depends on how low performing.
Also a lot of Northeastern schools that are low-income and do decent on the standardized test really put out really poorly socialized and generally dysfunctional kids and often have worse facilities and fewer extracurriculars than Southern Schools that may be weaker academically.
You can't just move to ACNJ or Waterbury CT and think you're gonna be better off than a great school in Florida or Texas. That's highly unlikely. But to be fair its unlikely you'd be moving to those rough cities if you were in a good school district in FL.
The difference is if you in Massachusetts the standard school is exceptional. In many of these sunbelt metros, there are exceptional school districts (sometime jsu school within a district) many of them filled with Yankees and 2nd generation students. From what I've seen a far higher % of all schools in NJ CT MA NH are going to be considered very good than in Metro ATL or Texas or in Florida or Georgia. But we are (or at least many of us are) fully aware there are excellent schools there. It's not as bad as many other states I don't want to insult here.
In MA for example many if not most people could probably name every town in the state that has a subpar (below national average NAEP scores) school district.
I'm aware that in a statistical sense, overall educational performance is higher in the Northeast than the South. But ultimately, students receive an education in a limited set of schools, not the state or surrounding region as a whole.
Metro Atlanta (or Raleigh-Durham, Austin, Nashville and so forth) is in the same state as extensive rural and small town areas where educational standards tend to be much lower, and the economy is oriented towards agriculture and basic manufacturing and services. Such places have a significant impact on statewide scholastic metrics across the South, but are not especially relevant to those living in the more prosperous sections of the metro areas.
I'm aware that in a statistical sense, overall educational performance is higher in the Northeast than the South. But ultimately, students receive an education in a limited set of schools, not the state or surrounding region as a whole.
Metro Atlanta (or Raleigh-Durham, Austin, Nashville and so forth) is in the same state as extensive rural and small town areas where educational standards tend to be much lower, and the economy is oriented towards agriculture and basic manufacturing and services. Such places have a significant impact on statewide scholastic metrics across the South, but are not especially relevant to those living in the more prosperous sections of the metro areas.
This can be a factor in the Northeast as well. I say that as NYC makes up about 45% of NY State's population and its public schools can skew things. That's not to say that there aren't good public schools there or that the other urban districts don't skew things, but it is one of those things to consider when looking at states as a whole.
I'm aware that in a statistical sense, overall educational performance is higher in the Northeast than the South. But ultimately, students receive an education in a limited set of schools, not the state or surrounding region as a whole.
Metro Atlanta (or Raleigh-Durham, Austin, Nashville and so forth) is in the same state as extensive rural and small town areas where educational standards tend to be much lower, and the economy is oriented towards agriculture and basic manufacturing and services. Such places have a significant impact on statewide scholastic metrics across the South, but are not especially relevant to those living in the more prosperous sections of the metro areas.
Another poster already said this applies ot the north as well. The main difference at least in New England is that the exurban and rural parts are also pretty well educated some are pretty bad but its not nearly as widespread as down south I think. And I'm confident if you compare Metro Atlanta or Metro Nashville to Metro DC Boston or Bridgeport it wouldn't perform as well. Maybe in YC of Philly because the urban/inner city part of the metro is a very high %share.
We actually have states that don't perform that well academically- most notably Maine and Rhode Island (all of which is the Providence Metro).
I'm aware that in a statistical sense, overall educational performance is higher in the Northeast than the South. But ultimately, students receive an education in a limited set of schools, not the state or surrounding region as a whole.
Metro Atlanta (or Raleigh-Durham, Austin, Nashville and so forth) is in the same state as extensive rural and small town areas where educational standards tend to be much lower, and the economy is oriented towards agriculture and basic manufacturing and services. Such places have a significant impact on statewide scholastic metrics across the South, but are not especially relevant to those living in the more prosperous sections of the metro areas.
This right here. The wisest post so far.
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.
