Why are so many people selling in Cleveland Heights? (Warren: school districts, voucher)

[Clevelander17]

There's probably no convincing anyone with a flight mentality that the CH schools offer a great education, particularly for the high-achievers, who are mostly isolated from the bottom of the barrel that drags down the schools' overall test scores. But were this not the case, then CHHS would not be sending dozens of graduates each year to Ivy League and similar institutions.

[kpl1228]

I'm a liberal, admittedly, yet many residents of Cleveland Heights can infuriate me with their smug style of hypocrisy.
Nuclear Free Zone, diverse community, yet the high school is fraught with racial tension. Education Ph.Ds and sociologists visit CH schools to look at it as a national case study of the "two high schools within one" mindset: one that offers college prep and AP courses, staff steering white students toward those tracks, while offering basic and career-planning courses for the black and minority kids. Papers and books have been written about it. Many liberal parents, Jewish and gentile, send their kids to private school.
I truly wish, as a liberal myself, that the parents of Cleveland Heights would "put their money where their mouth is" in regard to schools, especially CHHS. (The "now sending them to a private school for religious reasons" argument does not really hold water: CHHS had a substantial Jewish population within the student body for years and years). The neighborhoods and shops in Cleveland Heights do not have this problem to the extent of the schools, and given the history of the suburb, as well as the long-standing cooperative relationship between liberals, African Americans, and the Jewish community in CH, there's no excuse for CH to act this way with their schools. Yet they do. A community is only as strong as their public schools, yet many CH parents abandon them.
I like CH, and I do hope the OP ends up there as they hope.

[L2DB]

As a former CH resident who moved out of CH because of the schools, I think it's at least as much behavior-based as it is anything to do with the schools (teachers/classes/extracurriculars/etc) themselves. I still remember looking for movies for my son at the main library and overhearing a 9-10 year old kid (in a group of kids by the computers) talking about this kid at his school looking at him funny and how he should have "****ed him up" for it.

As for the "two schools within one" issue, I find it curious that it's at times been a defense of Shaker Heights schools on this forum, yet the perception of SH schools is still significantly more positive overall than CH schools.

[kpl1228]

Originally Posted by L2DB

As for the "two schools within one" issue, I find it curious that it's at times been a defense of Shaker Heights schools on this forum, yet the perception of SH schools is still significantly more positive overall than CH schools.

Agreed. And SH gets even more sociologists and professors writing about it than CH! I used to say that every HS student in SH nowadays has a egghead following him/her around with a tweed sportcoat and notepad.

[tribecavsbrowns]

Originally Posted by Clevelander17

There's probably no convincing anyone with a flight mentality that the CH schools offer a great education, particularly for the high-achievers, who are mostly isolated from the bottom of the barrel that drags down the schools' overall test scores. But were this not the case, then CHHS would not be sending dozens of graduates each year to Ivy League and similar institutions.

This statement is vague and unverifiable obviously, but I'm curious if it contains any truth. Does anyone know how many kids went to Ivies from Heights last year (pretty sure it's not "dozens"). And what is meant by "similar institutions?" Stanford and Northwestern? Caltech? Hiram?

[L2DB]

My impression is that it's probably true-ish.

I also find this defense curious given my impression of those that seem to make it. I think that a lot of people that make this argument (anyone can make it if they try hard enough because look at these people that did it) would never make the similar argument of "anyone can escape poverty because X previously poor person did it".

[kpl1228]

WELCOME TO HEIGHTS HIGH: THE CRIPPLING POLITICS OF RESTRUCTURING (URBAN LIFE & URBAN LANDSCAPE): DIANA TITTLE: 9780814206836: Amazon.com: Books

[Clevelander17]

Originally Posted by L2DB

As a former CH resident who moved out of CH because of the schools, I think it's at least as much behavior-based as it is anything to do with the schools (teachers/classes/extracurriculars/etc) themselves. I still remember looking for movies for my son at the main library and overhearing a 9-10 year old kid (in a group of kids by the computers) talking about this kid at his school looking at him funny and how he should have "****ed him up" for it.

As for the "two schools within one" issue, I find it curious that it's at times been a defense of Shaker Heights schools on this forum, yet the perception of SH schools is still significantly more positive overall than CH schools.

Behavior-based and ultimately race-based, unfortunately.

As for Shaker Heights, you're right, but the difference is that there is a larger proportion of honors/advanced students at SHHS.

Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns

This statement is vague and unverifiable obviously, but I'm curious if it contains any truth. Does anyone know how many kids went to Ivies from Heights last year (pretty sure it's not "dozens"). And what is meant by "similar institutions?" Stanford and Northwestern? Caltech? Hiram?

Verifiable through college attendance lists that the Black and Gold (Heights' newspaper) prints every year, usually in the late spring. The part about Ivies and "similar institutions" is a bit vague and debatable of course, but I think that there's about 80-100 schools that might fit that description, ranging from larger research-based schools like CWRU to smaller liberal arts schools like Oberlin (as far as local examples go). But the number of kids attending these competitive-admissions schools does usually number in the 20s or 30s and that does not include those going to strong public universities such as Ohio State.

The larger point is that Heights' academic programs and preparation still offers that pathway on the higher end for those that are up to the challenge. There aren't many of these kids, but again that's more of a residential demographic issue, not a school issue.

FWIW, I wouldn't put Hiram on that list.

[Clevelander17]

Originally Posted by L2DB

My impression is that it's probably true-ish.

I also find this defense curious given my impression of those that seem to make it. I think that a lot of people that make this argument (anyone can make it if they try hard enough because look at these people that did it) would never make the similar argument of "anyone can escape poverty because X previously poor person did it".

Curious? The only reason I ever make this point is to smash the argument that perceived school "quality" is based largely on anything other than demographics and that opportunities for success do exist at Heights. If you peak inside an AP Calculus classroom at Heights and an AP Calculus classroom at Beachwood, they'll look almost identical, if you catch my drift*. And if your kid qualifies for AP classes at Beachwood, they'd also qualify at Heights, and yes Heights would offer most of the same courses and extracurricular activities.



*There's no mystery as to what drives school ratings.

[WRnative]

I think this is a bigger problem than is commonly understood, especially in elementary schools.

There are physically violent children, who also regularly disrupt classrooms. I had friends who saw this as a major problem in the Shaker Heights elementary school that their children attended.

Parents whose children encounter violent children and classrooms where the educational process is retarded by disruptive behavior don't want anything to do with it, especially when their friends' children in schools without these problems are advancing more quickly. I know several teachers who say one or two problem children can do significant damage to the learning process in a classroom.

AP classes in elementary schools can often appease the parents of good elementary school students, but they also often raise issues of racial discrimination, and there's also an argument that withdrawing the best students from regular classrooms impairs the remaining students and certainly frustrates teachers left with the most challenged students.

There's something to be said for very strict discipline standards which once prevailed in American schools.

Fortunately, most school systems have really cracked down on bullying in the last decade, but I'm not certain that is sufficient.