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 always thought that the purpose of the state exams was to measure school progress more than individual student progress anyway. The selective high schools in the city want the kids to have interests outside of school. They're not interested in test prep robots as far as I can tell. Haven't gone through the college applications with kids yet, but I'm sure they are also looking for well-rounded students.
What you're saying about very wealthy kids makes sense, but I don't have personal experience in that school environment. For a time my husband went to a very expensive private school in the city, and was surprised by the problems some of the kids had (and he grew up in East Harlem in the 70s/80s).
I remember taking my entrance exam at a senior CUNY school a decade ago. I can never forget that day. Before the exam started two preppy parents dropped of their teen. It looked like they sky-dived out of the UES or something. The kid next to me was wearing his preppy private high school shirt. The kid went to some expensive Catholic school in Manhattan, and probably do to financial reasons his parents probably cant afford private college or what not, or maybe a senior CUNY as a last resort. During the exam the kid asked if he could cheat off of me. I had assumed kids who went to private school are better educated and more knowledgeable than inner city youths who attend public school, but to my dismay I was wrong! Again like I say is that parents spend money on private school tuition and expect the system to work and achieve results for their kids.
All true - my point was, test scores are being used by people who know nothing about education to tout the success of a given school.
Understood.
I guess we'll have to wait to see what the kids achieve in the future. Despite everything I said, I feel for the parents. They're trying to do what's best for their kids and many times the local school is terrible.
I remember taking my entrance exam at a senior CUNY school a decade ago. I can never forget that day. Before the exam started two preppy parents dropped of their teen. It looked like they sky-dived out of the UES or something. The kid next to me was wearing his preppy private high school shirt. The kid went to some expensive Catholic school in Manhattan, and probably do to financial reasons his parents probably cant afford private college or what not, or maybe a senior CUNY as a last resort. During the exam the kid asked if he could cheat off of me. I had assumed kids who went to private school are better educated and more knowledgeable than inner city youths who attend public school, but to my dismay I was wrong! Again like I say is that parents spend money on private school tuition and expect the system to work and achieve results for their kids.
Well, I hope you both did well on the test! The other thing my husband said was that the kids were very knowledgeable about drugs at a young age and assumed that he had them because he's black...
I find one should be critical of any opinions including yours and his.
I choose to listen to anyone...liberal or conservative if their ideas make sense.
Oprah Winfrey, a successful black woman, and perhaps one of the most well known successful blacks was not an Ivy League graduate.
So no, to be successful and black an individual does need a degree, let alone an Ivy League one. But yes I do agree educating oneself generally does defeat stereotypes about blacks.
Oprah Winfrey's original claim to fame was that she was a tv show host.
Outside of being a tv personality this level of success does not happen for blacks who just graduated from hbcus. She is not a good example. The Obamas, Ms. Rice, Eric Holder etc., all had top universities on their resume. We would never have heard of the otherwise.
Off topic, because, I don't think the Ivy League discussion is particularly relevant to the article, but I have to add that the repeated references are somewhat extra-grating for me because they remind me of someone I went out with - also an Ivy League graduate (from a law program) who found every excuse possible to mention it. He should have worn a sign around his neck or something...He only used the degree for about 6 months though (someone else paid for it).
Regarding former comments I made about focusing on state exams - in my opinion it's more in the school's interest rather than the students. Some test prep - fine, but the kids have to learn how to think, and have time to develop interests outside of school. But the pickings are really slim in many neighborhoods so I understand that the parents' choices are limited.
Oprah Winfrey's original claim to fame was that she was a tv show host.
Outside of being a tv personality this level of success does not happen for blacks who just graduated from hbcus. She is not a good example. The Obamas, Ms. Rice, Eric Holder etc., all had top universities on their resume. We would never have heard of the otherwise.
Was about to say the same thing, name me one wealthy black person outside of Entertainment or Sports who didnt get on without strong academic qualifications??
Gates and Zuckerberg still made the required academic standard for college entry then dropped out.
As NyWriter has pointed out unless you have a wealthy family to fall back on, education is the only route.
Look I couldnt care less about whether you are Left or Right politically, all I care about is what works Education and a lot of it works..
Cmon starting salary for an Ivy league grad 60-80k for some investment banks. Give me any other scenario except for a Dakota oil man where a young 21 year can make that kind of cash just starting out?
I can't work out if some of the other posters here are serious that lax parenting and lower levels of discipline would be advantageous to black or hispanic kid's future development in an environment where they will often encounter racial prejudice...?
Last edited by nograviti; 04-09-2015 at 06:03 AM..
Was about to say the same thing, name me one wealthy black person outside of Entertainment or Sports who didnt get on without strong academic qualifications??
Gates and Zuckerberg still made the required academic standard for college entry then dropped out.
As NyWriter has pointed out unless you have a wealthy family to fall back on, education is the only route.
Look I couldnt care less about whether you are Left or Right politically, all I care about is what works Education and a lot of it works..
Cmon starting salary for an Ivy league grad 60-80k for some investment banks. Give me any other scenario except for a Dakota oil man where a young 21 year can make that kind of cash just starting out?
I can't work out if some of the other posters here are serious that lax parenting and lower levels of discipline would be advantageous to black or hispanic kid's future development in an environment where they will often encounter racial prejudice...?
My husband's family is full of successful black men and women without Ivy degrees - sister is an accountant, other sister married a lawyer, someone else works in financial regulation, another in computers. No one fits the "stereotype"...(OK, no US presidents though...)
Lax parenting - no, I'm not advocating that. Do I want my kids to be treated equally by the school system? Yes. Do I want my kids peeing in their pants due to test prep stress? No.
I want my kids to do well in school of course, but also have time for friends and activities outside of school. I don't see how that equates to lax parenting.
But public schools can. They rarely do though - they are apathetic about it. Which disrupts every other kid's performance in that public school. In most charter schools they don't put up with such crap. And nor should they. Putting the rights of the disruptive A hole over the rights of the rest of the kids in the class to learn ...its been happening for years now.
Juan Gonzalez, a journo who is an avowed charter school critic, was complaining the other day about a charter school expelling a kid who'd been suspended 15 times. He said he was "astonished" that the kid had been suspended for amongst other things, throwing chairs.....
The fact that he was astonished by that shows how far most of us apart on this issue. Throwing chairs? Get outta my kid's class that's for sure.
The biggest thing holding most public school kids back is the small handful of kids with major problems, who disrupt their learning and foment an atmosphere of non-achievement.
NYC charter schools are majority black and Hispanic, and those who get in are doing well as a group. They deserve the chance to, obsessional politics by others with motivations unrelated to kids' education notwithstanding. If you want to fix traditional public schools then do that - stop dithering and pointing the fingers at alternative ways to success in education for kids that are working out. NYC public education, on the whole, has been a gigantic failure in the last 30 years. Huge dropout rates, whole schools below grade level. Unbelievable figures that don't seem real the first time you hear them. The temerity of the accusers sitting on that pile of s%t& is quite unbelievable.
Entertain me and explain how regular public schools can avoid putting up with defiant, disruptive behavior. I need a good laugh this morning, so have at it!
A chunk of the public is scum. If you want to increase your child's odds of success, you need to separate him/her from riff raff and put him in a competitive/high performing environment. Clearly some charter schools like Success have done that.
Public schools that produce low test takers and kids with poor grades condemn these kids to poverty. So if charter schools are able to help at least some kids escape poverty an extra cost is well worth it.
Charter schools have been around for awhile, and no one in politics has any issue with Eva Moskowitz making more money than Chancellor Farina. I'd say she deserves it if she is getting in good results. Pay is an excellent motivator.
^ Truth. BUT, with laws in place requiring the lowest, most defiant kids to be in school somewhere, that means said kids have to be somewhere. Ultimately, some school has to take those kids and absorb their defiant, disruptive behavior. Inevitably, the schools stuck doing this are the regular public schools. And the damage that can be done by defiant, disruptive kids can be ruinous to a classroom and school. THAT is what is breaking the public school system. The personnel at charter or private schools is rarely better-and often inferior!- to what you'd find in a regular public school. But those schools often weed out the disruptive kids who ruin learning environments.
It's actually interesting considering many of these policy makers in education have not spent a day teaching in a classroom.
In particular, those having not spent a day in a difficult, urban school setting with the kind of defiant behavior present they can not imagine.
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.
