LI High Schools in USN&WR 2021 Annual Rankings (New Rochelle: transfer, neighborhood)

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by monstermagnet

Yup, I love how they credit Giuliani with the benefits of Clinton's mega-economy and budget surpluses that lifted the entire country. Flash to 2001 and Reagans tax cuts and deficit defense spending to "win the cold war" that put us back on the road to debt, debt, deficits and more debt. Giuliani was an authoritarian who got lucky to have a soaring economy and when that fizzled he got a crisis to stand tall on. He rose to that occasion and got 2 decades of political benefit from it. How's he doing now?!

Yea, and it was more than just the US--multiple first world countries saw their inner city crime rates go down and often a reversal of emptying population from the urban cores. This is somewhat trickier to measure in some US cities than others, because US city sizes greatly vary in what their land area encompasses (and plus, there were annexations in some places) so some places can register a population growth earlier even as their inner core population plummets as happened in the city of Los Angeles.


One would hope that the forum of a site called "city-data" might mean more people have a handle on data about cities.

[85dumbo]

Originally Posted by SeventhFloor

DUMBO was never a high crime area. Don't spin it. Very easy to develop vacant land and unused factories.

As to the bolded, if Giuliani made East Flatbush so great, why not move there instead of DUMBO?

Yeah, there is no crime in the Faragut projects.. ok.

And all the DUMBO squeegee guys in the 80s was just my active childhood imagination.

[85dumbo]

How do explain the decline of Detroit if it was Clinton that made NYC and every city great?
NYC was on the same trajectory of Detroit pre-Giuliani.

[monstermagnet]

Originally Posted by 85dumbo

Yeah, there is no crime in the Faragut projects.. ok.

And all the DUMBO squeegee guys in the 80s was just my active childhood imagination.

not imagination, exaggeration.

[likm]

Originally Posted by Uggggs

That other list is skewed, there is a choice once you determine what you plan on studying. Second to that is the cost associated with going to the Ivy's that local NYC students can not afford - hence I mentioned many of those in Townsend end up in SUNYs. So it is a two part process, not ability to as per the USN list.

Also wanted to add...percentages matter as well. My graduating class in Tech was 1100, the year after was like 1300. So if only 24 students went to Ivy's out of 1000 and a LI school with 300 seniors and 9 go, the LI with 9 students is actually the better school - so its not just about pure numbers and why that list would be flawed.

Yes, of course it is skewed. Like I said, I was exchanging one biased list for another biased list.


Yes, I would imagine this list is affected by cost. However, the NYC schools at 1 (43% economically disadvantaged according to US News), 3 (no US News data), 4 (43%), and 8 (59%) do not appear to be filled with affluent families. I suppose that the affluent population in these schools can afford to send their children to HPM and possibly the poorer families are eligible for financial aid, leaving the middle or upper middle paying full fare.



There is probably a degree of self-filtering or guidance counselor filtering too. One of my colleagues was accepted to MIT, but chose to go to a different, also highly ranked school because one involved paying the full fare, while the other one was $0. He chose not to strap a mortgage payment on his back. T's wife went to Harvard, but her high school guidance counselor suggested that she was aiming too high and should go to a beauty school. Talk about a Grand Canyon sized gap.


Yes, the percentages matter - the Polaris page has some (not all) class size data for this. Multiplying their listed class size by four to approximate the number of students in the 2015-2018 period:



name admitted class size 4 year size Admission %
Hunter College 43 N/A
Chapin 18 N/A
Ethical Culture Fieldston 13 N/A
Chaminade 12 N/A
Collegiate 24 57 228 10.53%
Brearly 22 56 224 9.82%
Trinity 41 107 428 9.58%
Spence 15 48 192 7.81%
Dalton 34 115 460 7.39%
Horace Mann 45 183 732 6.15%
St Ann’s 19 82 328 5.79%
Nightingale-Bamford 9 39 156 5.77%
Rye Country Day School 22 97 388 5.67%
Manlius 6 43 172 3.49%

Regis 17 131 524 3.24%
Packer Collegiate 11 90 360 3.06%
Hackley 12 99 396 3.03%

Stuyvesant 94 804 3216 2.92%

Riverdale 14 124 496 2.82%
Ramaz 12 110 440 2.73%
Friends Seminary 7 66 264 2.65%
Lycee Francais 9 87 348 2.59%
North Shore Hebrew 6 68 272 2.21%
Bronxville 9 112 448 2.01%
Scarsdale 29 399 1596 1.82%

Columbia 8 113 452 1.77%

SAR 9 130 520 1.73%

United Nations International 7 102 408 1.72%

Manhasset 16 238 952 1.68%
Cold Spring Harbor 9 154 616 1.46%

Bronx Science 41 736 2944 1.39%

Poly Prep 6 120 480 1.25%

Bard 7 153 612 1.14%

Jericho 13 289 1156 1.12%

Edgemont 7 164 656 1.07%
Pittsford 10 244 976 1.02%

Garden City 12 306 1224 0.98%

Wheatley 6 160 640 0.94%

Horace Greely 12 335 1340 0.90%

Great Neck North 8 250 1000 0.80%
Nyack 7 226 904 0.77%

Briarcliff 5 162 648 0.77%
Canisius 6 206 824 0.73%

Great Neck South 8 301 1204 0.66%

Syosset 14 540 2160 0.65%
Rye High School 6 248 992 0.60%

Fiorello H Laguardia 16 662 2648 0.60%

John Jay 7 291 1164 0.60%
Mamaroneck 8 334 1336 0.60%

Roslyn 6 263 1052 0.57%

Baldwin 9 411 1644 0.55%

Somers 6 285 1140 0.53%

HHH West 8 389 1556 0.51%

Herricks 7 341 1364 0.51%

Ithaca 7 356 1424 0.49%

Brooklyn Tech 24 1269 5076 0.47%
Ward Melville 11 618 2472 0.44%

Northport 9 510 2040 0.44%

Paul D Schreiber 6 360 1440 0.42%

Suffern 6 365 1460 0.41%

Bayshore 7 433 1732 0.40%

Bethlehem Central 6 389 1556 0.39%

Clarkstown South 5 385 1540 0.32%

HHH East 6 464 1856 0.32%

Clarkstown North 5 396 1584 0.32%

New Rochelle 10 811 3244 0.31%

St Anthony’s 8 676 2704 0.30%

Midwood 7 771 3084 0.23%

Commack 5 624 2496 0.20%

Arlington 6 807 3228 0.19%


Edit: Arg. Anybody know how to format things?

[monstermagnet]

Originally Posted by 85dumbo

How do explain the decline of Detroit if it was Clinton that made NYC and every city great?
NYC was on the same trajectory of Detroit pre-Giuliani.

huh? Detroit declined first with the rust belt. Second with the auto industry lagging the tech sector by their own arrogance. Deindustrialization crushed Detroit. Auto production moved to Japan, remember?! American industrialization moved to computing and silicon chips (cha-ching $). The auto industry was inept. Detroit made overpriced, undervalued, out of touch cars while Toyota and Honda took over the world (and manufactured MORE in the US than the US companies, who moved their production to Mexico). Auto unions and management moved further apart. NYC is a financial center. We don't and haven't manufactured anything substantial here in a long time. Could not be LESS in common with Detroit's history, then OR now. Well, actually the similarity is both the auto industry (Detroit) and Finance Sector (NYC) needed taxpayer bailouts.

[long isle]

Baltimore’s Inner Harbor is another good example of how cities in the 90’s and 00’s got cleaned up quickly. The only thing people remember old Guiliani for is how he didn’t provide the FDNY with proper communication equipment before 9/11.

NYC had a murder of an English tourist in the Subway during his administration that got the attention of the federal government and a large increase in NYPD budget. That’s when the force grew.

[Coney]

One thing not mentioned here is that the elite private high schools hire guidance counselors with strong connections. I saw first-hand how the college admissions process was a racket. The bribes from hollywood celebrities was probably an extreme example and it puts the college admission counselors under the radar, for now. Eventually, the scandal will fade and it will go back to the way it was. Public high schools have guidance counselors that are assigned to dozens of kids. They give generic advice to the students and their parents. Private high schools have g.c. who specialize in college placement and work with 20 kids at a time on their applications. While I wouldn't go so far as to say that they "write" the students' applications, they tell the students what to write for a specific school because they know what that school is looking for in that year's recruitment. They know which schools are looking for more athletes this year, or English majors for the coming year. They will guide and select students from their high school on how their application should look and will review it several times before submitting it for the student. They have personal friendships with the regional admission reps from private colleges. The high school guidance counselor's salary is based on how many students they can push into an elite college.

[Dabaomb]

Originally Posted by SeventhFloor

Canarsie? Rough? Never got that impression, I have family in Canarsie.

I always got the impression that Canarsie was a very rough neighborhood. In fact, so rough that they had to close down the high school and replace it with several smaller schools because it was in such disarray and couldn't be fixed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canarsie_High_School

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by 85dumbo

How do explain the decline of Detroit if it was Clinton that made NYC and every city great?
NYC was on the same trajectory of Detroit pre-Giuliani.

Just about every urban core were on a negative trajectory from the 60s through the 80s. Most of them saw a marked shift around the early 90s, even pre-Giuliani (even NYC started seeing its crime rates fall pre-Giuliani). I don't think Clinton was really it, because some of these falls pre-date Clinton including those found in other cities in the first world. It's not to say that neither Clinton nor Giuliani had no effect whatsoever, but it does seem pretty clear there were other, more dominant factors if these trends started happening prior to either of the two's administrations within their respective offices as the trend was offset by a few years in different parts of developed countries with a spread of the mid-1980s and early 1990s with Western Europe and the US seeing the start of the drop mostly in the early 1990s. It's also unlikely to be a single direct factor, but possibly a larger collection of factors that are somewhat tied together economically, socially, or ecologically.

The mid-20th century was a time of pretty radical changes, so there are several possible factors that went into the rise in crime in the mid-20th century and then the drop towards the end of the 20th century. This also isn't going to be applied completely evenly as there can be substantial localized variation. Detroit is interesting in that it bucked quite a few other trends, but it was also a city heavily dependent on a single industrial sector that was having massive issues within the US and the world as the US automakers were losing market share everywhere and started cultivating a history of both expensive and unreliable products, and had a more dramatic fall than most cities with less stabilizing forces (such as a major research university within a city or being a state capital both of which tend to bring a constant stream of people from elsewhere) and a very notorious city versus suburb conflict. Detroit in the 1990 census had lost about 45% of its 1950 population peak--NYC had lost nearly 7% of its 1950 population peak. Even if you went for just the core of Manhattan, the loss from the 1950s to 1990s was a rather paltry 25% in comparison to that 45% loss, and both the city and the borough of Manhattan had actually recorded a population gain between the 1980 and the 1990 census. These are very different stats and trajectories between Detroit and NYC (or even just Manhattan) before the '94 election of Giuliani. You'd really have to be out of your gourd to pretend that these are all that similar by that time.


Anyhow, the great public high schools in NYC are a bit of a pressure cooker. The top ones are many and varied, but they can be quite difficult to get into. It makes sense that some people don't want to subject their kids to that kind of duress.

I think one thing to consider for those who are moving out of the city, but staying in the metropolitan area is that the top public high schools are rated better in the NJ suburbs of NYC rather than the LI suburbs. It seems to go NYC > NJ > Lower Hudson > Long Island. That doesn't mean there aren't great public schools in all of these, but it does seem like the NJ and Lower Hudson ones rank better at the top than the LI ones. Though as stated earlier, some of those top-ranking public high schools in NJ are actually magnet / screened schools (and sometimes urban ones) as well, so it's sort of like hopping into a different pressure cooker for some of those, so if the goal is to place kids based on essentially buying your way into a good public school, because you don't want your kids to be in that pressure cooker or you don't think your kids can pass muster, some of those high-ranking NJ public schools aren't going to be for you either.