[laulob]

Originally Posted by AMSS

What are you talking about? The robotics advisors I dealt with were from the public schools and they created it on their own, no corporations involved (they only give money to charters). Plus our math team always went up against Bridgeport and New Haven public schools....Bassick, in particular, was pretty tough.

Many schools apply for monies available as part of corporate donation programs. More often than not the needier schools are awarded more funding. The programs are through the schools but the money does not always come from them. Charters get money as well but so do the publics. Sometimes it is not money but materials. In some of the New Haven schools there are book rooms. They are essentially rooms full of books that students can take and keep. Free books. They are part of a corporate donation program as well.

[nonny]

Originally Posted by mrgmrg

I would be shocked if outcomes for either group of students were radically different as a result of attending school together.

While the general outcomes might be similar, if the appropriate resources were provided, the individual outcomes would not. Read Judith Rich Harris' work, or about her work, _ The Nurture Assumption_ . Peers matter tremendously. A whole swath would go up academically, and another swath would go down academically.

[mrgmrg]

And what makes you think that simply being in the same school as people from a different socioeconomic background would cause your child to regress to their level? Again, I'm amazed at the lack of confidence parents have in themselves. I went to a mixed high school and, unsurprisingly, was friends with kids who were like me: did well in school, were on a college track, were from upper middle class homes, and were expected to attend school, play sports, participate in extracurriculars, and get good grades. It never crossed my mind that I should start hanging out with the kids who (1) weren't in any of my honors or AP classes, (2) weren't on my sports teams, (3) weren't in my extracurricular activities, (4) didn't live in my neighborhood, and (5) had completely different backgrounds, interests, and goals than I did.

Apparently people think socioeconomic status is an airborne disease.

[Sigequinox]

Originally Posted by mrgmrg

And what makes you think that simply being in the same school as people from a different socioeconomic background would cause your child to regress to their level? Again, I'm amazed at the lack of confidence parents have in themselves. I went to a mixed high school and, unsurprisingly, was friends with kids who were like me: did well in school, were on a college track, were from upper middle class homes, and were expected to attend school, play sports, participate in extracurriculars, and get good grades. It never crossed my mind that I should start hanging out with the kids who (1) weren't in any of my honors or AP classes, (2) weren't on my sports teams, (3) weren't in my extracurricular activities, (4) didn't live in my neighborhood, and (5) had completely different backgrounds, interests, and goals than I did.

Apparently people think socioeconomic status is an airborne disease.

You keep attributing it to lack of parental confidence. I'm not sure where your getting that, or maybe a lot is getting lost in interpretation on here....

Last I checked, a parent has no control over what a kid does, who he meets and what he is exposed to when at school--the kids and teachers DO. The fact that someone would rather send their kid to a school where kids are generally more well behaved and less prone to a life of transgression is not really that much of a stretch.

I don't think anyone on here is denying the importance of parenting. It just seems that you are undervaluing the impact of peers, social acceptance/norms, and higher performing schools that encourage higher student involvement.

That all being said, I don't live in Fairfield, so BP kids going to school there would have no impact on my life. I'm in this convo purely for the philosophical value.

[mrgmrg]

When you essentially say: my child being in proximity to other children from different backgrounds is going to change the values I've imbued in my child and undermine the rules I set for my child, you are displaying a lack of confidence in your parenting abilities.

Again, no one is discussing the concept of sending your kid to a school where all the other students are not on a college track and are troublemakers. No one is advocating that sending your child to Bridgeport for high school is a great decision. The question is whether a high school with mixed group of students in attendance is going to have a negative impact on children. The answer is probably not.

Most commenters here seem unable to grasp the difference between correlation and causation, which makes this debate a pretty useless endeavor. To repeat: good schools are good because they have students with traits that are correllated to success in life, not because the schools themselves are inherently superior in any substantive way.

[nonny]

Please read the studies. The current data supports the influence of kids on each other. The assumption that kids' behavior is solely attributable to parents is outdated.

[Stratford, Ct. Resident]

Originally Posted by AMSS

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.

But the system is in decay. It has been gradually decaying for decades now. Talk to people that are in their 60's or older. Ask them how many of their schoolmates went for secondary education. Ask them how many of their schoolmates actually needed to obtain secondary degrees/certifications just to maintain a middle-class life.

Nearly everyone feels that "kids" today are smarter than "we" were at their age. And for the most part, they are. But the educators general refrain is that the kids aren't prepared. All i can do is scratch my head over this disconnect.

Bottom line..............Money(in the "practitioners" pockets) is the biggest concern in the education world today.

I'm not trying to attack you personally or call you greedy. I'm just a bit disgusted with the way the system has evolved.

[whome224]

I personally think all arguments regarding whether it would bring down the education of suburban kids or bring up the education of kids from urban districts is totally irrelevant. The main question is: should suburban tax dollars go towards educating people outside of the district? That's the real question...

[mrgmrg]

Originally Posted by whome224

I personally think all arguments regarding whether it would bring down the education of suburban kids or bring up the education of kids from urban districts is totally irrelevant. The main question is: should suburban tax dollars go towards educating people outside of the district? That's the real question...

Actually, a great way to avoid that question is to say: Let's eliminate local property tax funding for education and create a statewide taxation system to fund schools on a per-pupil basis with no variation between school districts, except perhaps for certain capital projects.

Really interested to hear the arguments against providing equal funding for students, and not allowing the amount of educational spending be directly correlated to the price of house their parents can afford.

[Wilton2ParkAve]

Originally Posted by mrgmrg

Actually, a great way to avoid that question is to say: Let's eliminate local property tax funding for education and create a statewide taxation system to fund schools on a per-pupil basis with no variation between school districts, except perhaps for certain capital projects.

Really interested to hear the arguments against providing equal funding for students, and not allowing the amount of educational spending be directly correlated to the price of house their parents can afford.

Actually the second part of the argument is porous. The amount of educational spending is not correlated to the the price of homes.

I don't have the full list handy but New Haven and Hartford spend more per pupil than the wealthy bedroom communities. (How districts stack up per-pupil - Education Matters). Again with so much waste and fraud in Hartford we should not even exert a single brain cell on turning these decisions over to the pols.