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.
While this is generally a true sentiment, not every kid from parents turns out well-- or problem free. There are families where one sibling turns out well-- and the other is a raging drug addict. You can't say that good families, and good parenting is 100% of the picture. As adolescents, kids are much more influence by peer groups than parents...
I completely disagree that kids are more greatly influenced by peers than parents. Yeah, you can have perfect parents who end up with a problem child as a result of genetics or a wrong place/wrong time situation. Success in life is a combination of nature and nurture and luck/coincidence, like pretty much everything. But kids who look to peers in excess do so for a reason, and it's typically because they lack strong guidance at home.
Essentially the moral of the story is, parents waste a lot of time, money, and energy worrying about where they send their kids to school instead of worrying about how they're raising their children. A dad who spends 3 hours commuting and 10 hours working per day to be able to afford to live in [insert 95% white, median income >$120k community here] (let alone 2 parents who do that) would better serve his children by focusing more on parenting and less on ensuring his children grow up in a bubble of white wealth.
And once you accept that, you accept the fact that a lot of the "living in a good school district" obsession is really subterfuge for satisfying the parents' egos. It's a lot about living in [rich town that projects the image you care a lot about] and having the important career than it is about the kids. Equivalent to the parents who push their children to excel in athletics or who pressure their children to attend a prestigious school. It's clear to everyone else what that's really about--the parent. Same thing with the "good school district" BS.
I completely disagree that kids are more greatly influenced by peers than parents. Yeah, you can have perfect parents who end up with a problem child as a result of genetics or a wrong place/wrong time situation. Success in life is a combination of nature and nurture and luck/coincidence, like pretty much everything. But kids who look to peers in excess do so for a reason, and it's typically because they lack strong guidance at home.
Essentially the moral of the story is, parents waste a lot of time, money, and energy worrying about where they send their kids to school instead of worrying about how they're raising their children. A dad who spends 3 hours commuting and 10 hours working per day to be able to afford to live in [insert 95% white, median income >$120k community here] (let alone 2 parents who do that) would better serve his children by focusing more on parenting and less on ensuring his children grow up in a bubble of white wealth.
And once you accept that, you accept the fact that a lot of the "living in a good school district" obsession is really subterfuge for satisfying the parents' egos. It's a lot about living in [rich town that projects the image you care a lot about] and having the important career than it is about the kids. Equivalent to the parents who push their children to excel in athletics or who pressure their children to attend a prestigious school. It's clear to everyone else what that's really about--the parent. Same thing with the "good school district" BS.
Yeah, the children of immigrant parents who speak 3 words of english and grow up with not even an accent must be because of the parenting, not the fact that they are surrounded by people which they are trying to normalize with. There is an enormous amount of evidence that children learn an incredible amount from peers (as well as various forms of media like TV, internet, games etc), so to sit there and act like its not a huge role is pretty disingenuous.
A key word you used is "luck". In reality, "luck" is "probability" and probability is pretty much the foundation of my reasoning. The probability of your kid hanging out with the "wrong crowd" and going down the "wrong path" increases greatly (proportionately?) with the amount of dead beat kids in the school. Plain and simple. Nothing is guaranteed. I'm sure people drop out of Harvard addicted to heroine and sell their pooper for money on the street. However, I bet that happens at a much higher frequency at an inner city HS in Chicago.
Kids (people in general) want acceptance--they assimilate to their surrounding in order to fit in. If your kid goes to a school where the "cool kids" are the kids who play in the marching band or belong to the math club, instead of the kids who smoke cigarettes and bang chicks in the backseat of their Honda CIvic with spinnin rims,I'd say as a parent you have a much higher chance of your kid being successful--whether or not you have a masters degree, make over 120k a year, are poor, black, round eye, whatever.
I do, however, agree with you 100% about parents being around more for their kids. The world we live in today is an expensive and fast paced one. The new norm (at least of my generation) will be 2 working parents. The lucky will be able to afford to have 1 parent stay at home until the kids go to school, but the rest will use day care, nannys and other forms of non parent-child upbringings during precious developmental years. Not sure how fast I'm willing to blame them for trying to provide as much [financial] stability to their childs lives as possible. Meh, whole other topic though.
I completely disagree that kids are more greatly influenced by peers than parents. Yeah, you can have perfect parents who end up with a problem child as a result of genetics or a wrong place/wrong time situation. Success in life is a combination of nature and nurture and luck/coincidence, like pretty much everything. But kids who look to peers in excess do so for a reason, and it's typically because they lack strong guidance at home.
Essentially the moral of the story is, parents waste a lot of time, money, and energy worrying about where they send their kids to school instead of worrying about how they're raising their children. A dad who spends 3 hours commuting and 10 hours working per day to be able to afford to live in [insert 95% white, median income >$120k community here] (let alone 2 parents who do that) would better serve his children by focusing more on parenting and less on ensuring his children grow up in a bubble of white wealth.
And once you accept that, you accept the fact that a lot of the "living in a good school district" obsession is really subterfuge for satisfying the parents' egos. It's a lot about living in [rich town that projects the image you care a lot about] and having the important career than it is about the kids. Equivalent to the parents who push their children to excel in athletics or who pressure their children to attend a prestigious school. It's clear to everyone else what that's really about--the parent. Same thing with the "good school district" BS.
This isn't entirely directed just as mrgmrg.... but how many of you actually attended a failing school with major behavioral issues and inner city demographics (both in terms of income and makeup). Part of me says until you do, ****. I'm an interesting case study because I've actually been able to infiltrate the upper strata and shake off my painful K-12 experience. My parents most likely kept me on the right track and was further anchored by having one parent home full time.
Just to be clear, my childhood school district has long been taken over by the state (of NY). We had metal detectors since the mid 1980s and prior to it becoming "fashionable" post-Columbine. My district wasn't Brownsville NY, but we did preempt Days of our Lives for a huge riot back in '96 The experience gave me a tougher exoskeleton and tenacity which has probably benefited me in the business world. I now work in alternative asset management and my wife is able to be home now that we have several children despite a good career in law. It all turned out well. But I am the exception, and truthfully I would do it all over again at a "better" school district if given the opportunity. I probably wouldn't have made it to where I am today, but I think I'd be okay with that. Most of my friends are jittery from the days of looking over our shoulders and being on guard constantly from the gangs. It has held back careers, relationships and "life". Many of these folks had good raw ingredients--- high IQs, good families. But without strong peers, the experiment came undone. That's all there is to it. The urbanists will find out the hard way, just like I did.
This isn't entirely directed just as mrgmrg.... but how many of you actually attended a failing school with major behavioral issues and inner city demographics (both in terms of income and makeup). Part of me says until you do, ****. I'm an interesting case study because I've actually been able to infiltrate the upper strata and shake off my painful K-12 experience. My parents most likely kept me on the right track and was further anchored by having one parent home full time.
Just to be clear, my childhood school district has long been taken over by the state (of NY). We had metal detectors since the mid 1980s and prior to it becoming "fashionable" post-Columbine. My district wasn't Brownsville NY, but we did preempt Days of our Lives for a huge riot back in '96 The experience gave me a tougher exoskeleton and tenacity which has probably benefited me in the business world. I now work in alternative asset management and my wife is able to be home now that we have several children despite a good career in law. It all turned out well. But I am the exception, and truthfully I would do it all over again at a "better" school district if given the opportunity. I probably wouldn't have made it to where I am today, but I think I'd be okay with that. Most of my friends are jittery from the days of looking over our shoulders and being on guard constantly from the gangs. It has held back careers, relationships and "life". Many of these folks had good raw ingredients--- high IQs, good families. But without strong peers, the experiment came undone. That's all there is to it. The urbanists will find out the hard way, just like I did.
Here's the thing: Why should charters be the only ones to not allow discipline problems in the schools. Why don't we just let schools go back to disciplining rather than privatize the entire American education system over it?
^x2. K-12 NYC public schools survivor here too.
Top priority for me was to move to a town where my kids would have the opportunity to learn in a safe, healthy environment, without having to deal with all the inner city distractions that defined my childhood.
^x2. K-12 NYC public schools survivor here too.
Top priority for me was to move to a town where my kids would have the opportunity to learn in a safe, healthy environment, without having to deal with all the inner city distractions that defined my childhood.
Other side of the coin for me. I went to a good (decent) high school but came from a divorced family and lived with mom who was not very strict with me. I was easily distracted by ladies and social status. I did what typical suburbanite kids in HS did: I drank my face off. Now I'm a first generation college grad and don't drink. I absorbed what I was surrounded by, and I might be a very different person today had I been surrounded by the garbage typically seen in urban schools.
Last edited by Sigequinox; 03-17-2014 at 05:44 AM..
Here's the thing: Why should charters be the only ones to not allow discipline problems in the schools. Why don't we just let schools go back to disciplining rather than privatize the entire American education system over it?
Finally, something I can agree with. Our schools have gone soft. Like, wayyyyyy soft. This is an issue that transcends any socioeconomic grade in education. Not everyone is a winner at everything. We need to encourage kids to "find themselves" not tell them their great at soccer when they suck big time. Breeding a generation of workers who will expect their boss to coddle them when they cannot perform is not beneficial to society.
I'm not saying the teacher needs to gives my kid a beat down with a ruler, but they shouldn't have to fear law suites at every form of discipline.
Finally, something I can agree with. Our schools have gone soft. Like, wayyyyyy soft. This is an issue that transcends any socioeconomic grade in education. Not everyone is a winner at everything. We need to encourage kids to "find themselves" not tell them their great at soccer when they suck big time. Breeding a generation of workers who will expect their boss to coddle them when they cannot perform is not beneficial to society.
I'm not saying the teacher needs to gives my kid a beat down with a ruler, but they shouldn't have to fear law suites at every form of discipline.
But they do. Repeal those laws that allow that rather than blame teacher's unions (not saying you were one to do that)....and after I graduated my then blue collar high school, I ran into many coddled kids way back then mostly from private schools and wealthier suburbs. That's nothing new.
But I will disagree on your theory regarding city schools. They could and should be good...for some kids, they are good. I've found city kids who are far better adjusted than kids who grew up in extremely comfortable surroundings. I wouldn't say suburban schools are better just because it made things easier for lax parenting.
Either way, I'm really tired about this whole idea that "public schools are in decay". It's just a ploy being used by the current crop of charter entrepreneurs whose "exceptionalism" comes from selecting students, getting rid of bad students, rejecting special ed students and teaching to the test. Heck there's a new report out today regarding charters tossing kids out right before testing begins.
While this is generally a true sentiment, not every kid from parents turns out well-- or problem free. There are families where one sibling turns out well-- and the other is a raging drug addict. You can't say that good families, and good parenting is 100% of the picture. As adolescents, kids are much more influence by peer groups than parents...
This is so true, I've seen it time and time again. And just wait 'til your kids start dating...
^x2. K-12 NYC public schools survivor here too.
Top priority for me was to move to a town where my kids would have the opportunity to learn in a safe, healthy environment, without having to deal with all the inner city distractions that defined my childhood.
That was your priority and I get that. But some people didn't want to do that or don't have the means to do that. Rather than say they are stuck, why not help the community make the best of itself?
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.
The experience gave me a tougher exoskeleton and tenacity which has probably benefited me in the business world. I now work in alternative asset management and my wife is able to be home now that we have several children despite a good career in law. It all turned out well. But I am the exception, and truthfully I would do it all over again at a "better" school district if given the opportunity. I probably wouldn't have made it to where I am today, but I think I'd be okay with that. Most of my friends are jittery from the days of looking over our shoulders and being on guard constantly from the gangs. It has held back careers, relationships and "life". Many of these folks had good raw ingredients--- high IQs, good families. But without strong peers, the experiment came undone. That's all there is to it. The urbanists will find out the hard way, just like I did.
