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.
"According to the UCLA Civil Rights Project, New York State has the most segregated public schools in the nation. Nearly three-quarters of the charter schools in New York City are considered “apartheid schools” because less than 1% of their enrollment is white. Charters are often more racially segregated than the district in which they are located."
What an outrageous statement. Minority parents will beg, borrow and steal to get their kids into these Charter Schools. They could give a rat's you know what if there are no white kids in the school. All they care about is that their kids are getting a good education. A good education does not require that there be white kids in the classroom.
Apartheid? This comment must have been made by some teacher union flunky, who hates charter schools because the teachers don't pay dues to his stupid union.
They won't let white kids into charter schools. That would be labeled as racism: allowing whitey to escape the darker, imperfect public school system via publicly-funded white privilege.
They won't let white kids into charter schools. That would be labeled as racism: allowing whitey to escape the darker, imperfect public school system via publicly-funded white privilege.
Maybe White kids use other school options like private schools or select public schools. It may have to do with where the schools are located as well.
My take is that the powers that be running the charters are attempting to lay the ground work using mostly minorities so they cannot be accused of creating a system of publicly funded private schools merely to "save" white kids from the more integrated true public sschool system. Plus, if they can show success with an overwhelming majority of minority students, it becomes much harder for the teachers' unions and progressive politicians to effectively attack them.
My take is that the powers that be running the charters are attempting to lay the ground work using mostly minorities so they cannot be accused of creating a system of publicly funded private schools merely to "save" white kids from the more integrated true public sschool system. Plus, if they can show success with an overwhelming majority of minority students, it becomes much harder for the teachers' unions and progressive politicians to effectively attack them.
That could be true or perhaps economics is a factor, as there are high/predominate minority of various income levels. So, there may be a coincidence of many high minority neighborhoods being lower income neighborhoods as well.
My take is that the powers that be running the charters are attempting to lay the ground work using mostly minorities so they cannot be accused of creating a system of publicly funded private schools merely to "save" white kids from the more integrated true public sschool system. Plus, if they can show success with an overwhelming majority of minority students, it becomes much harder for the teachers' unions and progressive politicians to effectively attack them.
Disagree. They are putting them where the demand is, which are minority neighborhoods with crappy schools. There is no demand on the Upper East Side for Charter Schools because the public elementary schools are good.
But that opens up another can of worms. The District boundary line on the east side of Manhattan "coincidentally" is along the boundary of East Harlem and the Upper East Side. North of the line - all minorities; south of the line - few minorities.
It is absolutely amazing that the city and its "progressive" mayor get away with what appears to be deliberate segregation. Where are you, Al Sharpton?
Disagree. They are putting them where the demand is, which are minority neighborhoods with crappy schools. There is no demand on the Upper East Side for Charter Schools because the public elementary schools are good.
But that opens up another can of worms. The District boundary line on the east side of Manhattan "coincidentally" is along the boundary of East Harlem and the Upper East Side. North of the line - all minorities; south of the line - few minorities.
It is absolutely amazing that the city and its "progressive" mayor get away with what appears to be deliberate segregation. Where are you, Al Sharpton?
As Success Academy opens in more upscale areas, the non-union chain has become a lightning rod for critics including the new mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio, touching off a battle that threatens the growth of Success and the charter movement in the city.
“They’re trying to find ways to increase test scores; that’s why they go into the wealthier neighborhoods,” said Jonathan Westin, executive director of New York Communities for Change, a membership and union-funded nonprofit that advocates for low-income families. “It’s a false premise and it gets away from what charter schools were supposed to be used for. Charter schools were supposed to help low-income communities.”
Founded by former city councilwoman Eva Moskowitz in 2006, the Success Academy group has outstripped traditional public schools on standardized tests. In mathematics, it says its schools delivered rates of student proficiency on state tests of 82 percent last year -- versus 30 percent for all of New York City. Success gets five applications for every open seat, with students chosen by lottery. Donations from Wall Street hedge funds and others almost doubled last year to $23 million.
Quote:
Success Academy benefits from donations from hedge-fund managers including Third Point LLC’s Dan Loeb, who’s also chairman of the chain. In addition, Success gets money from the government for each student equal to about 70 percent of the roughly $20,000 allocated to regular public schools. Its 22 schools enrolled 6,700 students this year, up from 14 schools and 4,500 students a year earlier.
Five of the 22 schools, four of which opened in the last three years, are located in U.S. Census tracts with incomes above the city median. One is on the Upper West Side, where the median household made $109,313 in 2012.
Three of the nine new elementary and middle schools that Success planned for next year were to be located in affluent areas, before de Blasio’s real estate actions... Applications to charter schools are allowed from outside their neighborhoods.
Charters are a way of doing an end run around the teachers union and need those wealthy kids to help prop up test scores.
Charters are a way of doing an end run around the teachers union and need those wealthy kids to help prop up test scores.
Your posted data shows 5 out of 22 schools are in "wealthy" neighborhoods and 3 of the next 9 proposed. That would have been 8 out of 31. So that's supposed to shine a negative light and expose "bias" on the part of charters? 23 out of 31 being located in average or below average income neighborhoods?
Maybe you needed a charter school a few years back?
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.
