Why Philly has so many bad schools? (Philadelphia, Chester: middle-class, transplants)

[Fireshaker]

Originally Posted by 1ondoner

This does not apply to Asian immigrants. I think it's limited to Hispanics, they have disdain for English which is perplexing given their insistence on immigrating to the US

Not only is this a generalization, but it's an incorrect one. I live in a heavily Asian neighborhood, and almost none of them speak anything close to English. Their kids, maybe, but the adults are content to live in their own bubble.

[Fireshaker]

Originally Posted by AJNEOA

Good schools and poverty are ALMOST completely linked. Chestnut Hill and Mount Airy are two examples where the schools should be better, but nearly everyone with money sends their children to private school. Jenks should be a top city school.

On the other end, it takes time to change a school once money arrives, assuming people invest in the school. There can be a delay for sure.

CH and Mount Airy were two areas I thought of immediately. Far Northeast, too.

The "good" city schools weren't always good. It took pioneering parents to say, "You know what? We're going to stay and make this work." And from that sprung some of the best rated schools we have today. Problem is, people usually want the "perfect" school today, instead of settling on a "good" school and working to make it better.

[PhilliesPhan2013]

There's one huge component that often gets overlooked when it comes to discussions about the Philly SD: the part that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania plays in it. Across PA, urban and rural SDs--which typically host a larger number of students living in poverty--are underfunded compared to suburban SDs. This is due to how SD funding is linked to the property taxes that a SD can collect. Districts that host a larger number of students on the lower end of the socioeconomic continuum often can't bring in the revenue required to properly fund schools, therefore exacerbating many conditions that some people would find to be "unfavorable." Aside from that, parental involvement, outside influences, and a lack of extracurricular activities (again, due to a lack of SD funding) are all factors that lead to the perception that an area has "bad schools."

IMO, the Philadelphia School District is heading in a positive direction. Julia R. Masterman is already the #1 ranked HS in PA (#43 in the nation), while Central, Franklin Towne, MaST, Tacony Academy, and other public high schools also rank favorably. McCall, Penn Alexander, Adaire, and others are great examples of quality elementary and middle schools in the city. Even schools that don't rank as favorably as the others, such as Roxborough and Northeast HS, have AP and honors courses. I'm 23 and a while away from having kids of my own, but I wouldn't have a problem sending them to city schools if the future wife and I decide to live in Spruce Hill, Queen Village, Northern Liberties/Fishtown, and certain other neighborhoods.

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan2013

There's one huge component that often gets overlooked when it comes to discussions about the Philly SD: the part that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania plays in it. Across PA, urban and rural SDs--which typically host a larger number of students living in poverty--are underfunded compared to suburban SDs. This is due to how SD funding is linked to the property taxes that a SD can collect. Districts that host a larger number of students on the lower end of the socioeconomic continuum often can't bring in the revenue required to properly fund schools, therefore exacerbating many conditions that some people would find to be "unfavorable." Aside from that, parental involvement, outside influences, and a lack of extracurricular activities (again, due to a lack of SD funding) are all factors that lead to the perception that an area has "bad schools."

IMO, the Philadelphia School District is heading in a positive direction. Julia R. Masterman is already the #1 ranked HS in PA (#43 in the nation), while Central, Franklin Towne, MaST, Tacony Academy, and other public high schools also rank favorably. McCall, Penn Alexander, Adaire, and others are great examples of quality elementary and middle schools in the city. Even schools that don't rank as favorably as the others, such as Roxborough and Northeast HS, have AP and honors courses. I'm 23 and a while away from having kids of my own, but I wouldn't have a problem sending them to city schools if the future wife and I decide to live in Spruce Hill, Queen Village, Northern Liberties/Fishtown, and certain other neighborhoods.

You make some valid points about the Commonwealth, but the PSD is far from good, or even solid, so it's not an issue of perception. The schools you mentioned are largely outliers.
Its often a very tough decision for many parents who enjoy the city life but want the best for their children, and 9 time out of 10, the suburban schools are the answer. If I had children, I would not want them in Philadelphia Public Schools (minus a few), and I don't think I, or anyone should be chastised for that viewpoint.

Just trying to show you the other side of the argument.

There is hope for the PSD (partially what the soda tax is for), but I think we are at least a decade away from having any sort of sustainable improvements on a large scale.

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan2013

IMO, the Philadelphia School District is heading in a positive direction. Julia R. Masterman is already the #1 ranked HS in PA (#43 in the nation), while Central, Franklin Towne, MaST, Tacony Academy, and other public high schools also rank favorably. McCall, Penn Alexander, Adaire, and others are great examples of quality elementary and middle schools in the city. Even schools that don't rank as favorably as the others, such as Roxborough and Northeast HS, have AP and honors courses. I'm 23 and a while away from having kids of my own, but I wouldn't have a problem sending them to city schools if the future wife and I decide to live in Spruce Hill, Queen Village, Northern Liberties/Fishtown, and certain other neighborhoods.

Aren't some or all of the three schools I boldfaced public charters?

On your list of great quality elementary and middle schools, you left off the other school besides Penn Alexander whose district parents kill to get into: William T. Meredith.

But you might also be interested in the anecdotes I collect in a mental file labeled "The Philadelphia public schools aren't as bad as everyone says they are."

The anecdotes come from parents of children in public schools that don't rate as highly as these, such as Andrew Jackson in East Passyunk or Lingelbach on the Germantown/Mt. Airy border.

The stories I heard from parents of children in those schools provide anecdotal ammo for that small but growing body of research that finds that public schools are as good (or as bad) as the parents who decide to enroll their children in them make them. (And that kids from "good" families can do quite well in "bad" schools.)

[AJNEOA]

Originally Posted by Fireshaker

CH and Mount Airy were two areas I thought of immediately. Far Northeast, too.

The "good" city schools weren't always good. It took pioneering parents to say, "You know what? We're going to stay and make this work." And from that sprung some of the best rated schools we have today. Problem is, people usually want the "perfect" school today, instead of settling on a "good" school and working to make it better.

As a parent myself, the question isn't so much of wanting a good school to be perfect. It's wanting a school to be baseline decent, so you can be somewhat assured that the investment into your child (which is a big risk) will be the right investment. Especially if you have more than one child. For example, I would be very willing to invest in a school that's sitting around a 5 and showing some improvement (or even staying the same). But a school that's ranking as a 2 or a 3 is too much risk.

Any "pioneering parent" has had to live the life and be really involved. And in the end, risk is there for them and their child. The risk of your child being behind when they go to high school, take exams or go to college is a scary one.

[daboywonder2002]

Originally Posted by AJNEOA

As a parent myself, the question isn't so much of wanting a good school to be perfect. It's wanting a school to be baseline decent, so you can be somewhat assured that the investment into your child (which is a big risk) will be the right investment. Especially if you have more than one child. For example, I would be very willing to invest in a school that's sitting around a 5 and showing some improvement (or even staying the same). But a school that's ranking as a 2 or a 3 is too much risk.

Any "pioneering parent" has had to live the life and be really involved. And in the end, risk is there for them and their child. The risk of your child being behind when they go to high school, take exams or go to college is a scary one.

I used to live in Delaware County and moved to Minnesota for my job. Been looking to move back, but the bad schools are not helping. For me, I have sent my child to a low ranked school and a top ranked school. The difference are so noticeable. The amount of homework, the type of students in class, accountability. My main problem with public schools is that they are basically babysitters. They aren't CHALLENGING students. just doing the bare minimum. As a parent, there's only so much you can do. And let's say your child is excelling. Then it becomes well this school is too easy for my child

[MB1562]

Originally Posted by daboywonder2002

My main problem with public schools is that they are basically babysitters. They aren't CHALLENGING students. just doing the bare minimum. As a parent, there's only so much you can do. And let's say your child is excelling. Then it becomes well this school is too easy for my child

My main problem with this is that you don't know what you're talking about. If you truly think all public schools do is babysit and never present kids challenging work, come spend a day with me, a public teacher. Stop parroting ridiculous talking points.

[phillytransplant13]

Originally Posted by Fireshaker

The "good" city schools weren't always good. It took pioneering parents to say, "You know what? We're going to stay and make this work." And from that sprung some of the best rated schools we have today. Problem is, people usually want the "perfect" school today, instead of settling on a "good" school and working to make it better.

^This. My neighborhood public elementary schools (Manayunk/Roxborough) are heavily supported by the parents and community, and as such their reputation is better than other public schools in the area. I've spoken to a teacher at one of the schools who has all the necessary supplies for all of her kids largely due to parent fundraising. The ratings online aren't everything.

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by daboywonder2002

I used to live in Delaware County and moved to Minnesota for my job. Been looking to move back, but the bad schools are not helping. For me, I have sent my child to a low ranked school and a top ranked school. The difference are so noticeable. The amount of homework, the type of students in class, accountability. My main problem with public schools is that they are basically babysitters. They aren't CHALLENGING students. just doing the bare minimum. As a parent, there's only so much you can do. And let's say your child is excelling. Then it becomes well this school is too easy for my child

I can almost guarantee that virtually every public school district in Delaware County is superior to virtually any private school and superior to those in Minnesota. Where exactly were you located? Chester?

The Philadelphia suburbs are nationally known for their top notch public school districts. Claiming that public schools teachers are babysitters is one of the most ridiculous statement I have heard on city-data, and I have seen some bad one.

P.S. I am graduate of Penncrest High School in Delaware County and I turned out pretty well.