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.
The argument isn't about sending more kids to Fox Chapel School District schools. At least it isn't for me. The argument is about putting more school feeder patterns under common administration, which will allow for more competitive offerings, such as specialized magnet schools.
Really though, FCSD is near the bottom of my list of concerns. I'm interested in the idea of school district mergers because I want the city to come back. Part of doing that is fixing "the school problem" Sadly, the school problem is in large part about perceptions - wealthy white parents think something is wrong with city schools, so they don't enroll here, thus the disproportionately poor and black schools do worse, which increases the perception they are bad, which causes yet more parents of means to withdraw...and so on down the line. If you could somehow convince all the yuppie breeders to enroll their kids in Woolslair (or something similar) at the same time, I have no doubt there would be a shocking improvement. Hell, I hear Phillips on the South Side is starting to get better for essentially that reason.
The only way to arrest this, I think, is to break schooling out of local feeder patterns, and to make competitive magnet options more central. This allows people to stay wherever they're comfortable - even if it's in the middle of the city - without fear of their child going to a substandard school.
Your whole argument is based on the premise that people in the burbs want access to the city's magnet schools. I only think a few suburban parents would find this attractive and most would be opposed to it.
If the goal is to get wealthy white parents to enroll in the PPS system I think the PPS needs smaller neighborhood elementary schools. This of course would not help those who live in poorer neighborhoods. I don't think that is the goal though. I think the goal is to educate the poor black students who do go to PPS system schools.
I think Catholic Schools steal desirable students from PPS too.
wealthy white parents think something is wrong with city schools, so they don't enroll here, thus the disproportionately poor and black schools do worse, which increases the perception they are bad, which causes yet more parents of means to withdraw...and so on down the line. If you could somehow convince all the yuppie breeders to enroll their kids in Woolslair (or something similar) at the same time, I have no doubt there would be a shocking improvement.
Bingo, and this is why it's so hard to improve a public school district that already has a bad rep anywhere in the country. The reason this is so hard to overcome is because few people are willing to gamble when it comes to their kids. Even the staunchest supporters of what you are suggesting think twice when it's their own kids on the line. Many people still remember what happened with Jimmy Carter (for those who are not familiar, when JC was President he vowed to send his daughter thru the DC public school system to make an example, and then ended up pulling her out and sending her to an exclusive private school).
Plenty of people are willing to be "urban pioneers" for neighborhood gentrification, few people are willing to volunteer their kids as "urban school pioneers".
Your whole argument is based on the premise that people in the burbs want access to the city's magnet schools. I only think a few suburban parents would find this attractive and most would be opposed to it.
If the goal is to get wealthy white parents to enroll in the PPS system I think the PPS needs smaller neighborhood elementary schools. This of course would not help those who live in poorer neighborhoods. I don't think that is the goal though. I think the goal is to educate the poor black students who do go to PPS system schools.
I think Catholic Schools steal desirable students from PPS too.
Generally, I think parents would prefer schools closer to home (especially for younger kids). Living close to school also makes it easier for parents to be involved (e.g. PSCC/PTO meetings).
There are sufficient numbers of wealthy parents (white or otherwise) in the city that I don't think it is necessary to try and import them from the suburbs.
I think Charter Schools are more of a threat to PPS than Catholic Schools. For example, the Environmental Charter School (ECS) has drawn alot of families on the east end that used to go to PPS. The advantage of charters is that they appear to have smaller and more localized administrative structure and because you have to apply to get in a charter you are more likely to have involved parents.
Really though, FCSD is near the bottom of my list of concerns. I'm interested in the idea of school district mergers because I want the city to come back. Part of doing that is fixing "the school problem" Sadly, the school problem is in large part about perceptions - wealthy white parents think something is wrong with city schools, so they don't enroll here, thus the disproportionately poor and black schools do worse, which increases the perception they are bad, which causes yet more parents of means to withdraw...and so on down the line. If you could somehow convince all the yuppie breeders to enroll their kids in Woolslair (or something similar) at the same time, I have no doubt there would be a shocking improvement. Hell, I hear Phillips on the South Side is starting to get better for essentially that reason.
Being a resident of Wilkinsburg, I'm inclined to expand these notions beyond the City and also include all the suburban districts which are suffering under the status quo for similar reasons.
Incidentally, as I have noted many times before, if all the big suburban schools districts were handling at least as large a share of disadvantaged students as Fox Chapel, a lot of these issues would be far less pressing. So I agree Fox Chapel isn't so much the problem when it comes to suburban districts--it is the existence of suburban districts like Wilkinsburg, whereas at the same time there are suburban districts that unlike Fox Chapel are not doing their share.
There have been a lot of studies on this subject in recent years, using cases in different states.
Here is one relatively recent summary. These authors are generally in favor of consolidating small districts, but they acknowledge the case often gets weaker as districts get bigger:
You may disagree, but I generally think it is worth agreeing at the outset that consolidation does not always save money. That way you can move onto what is usually the more immediately relevant issue, which is whether consolidation might save money in any particular case, or category of cases (the latter being relevant if, say, you are engaged in making state policy related to consolidation).
Generally, I think parents would prefer schools closer to home (especially for younger kids). Living close to school also makes it easier for parents to be involved (e.g. PSCC/PTO meetings).
There are sufficient numbers of wealthy parents (white or otherwise) in the city that I don't think it is necessary to try and import them from the suburbs.
I think Charter Schools are more of a threat to PPS than Catholic Schools. For example, the Environmental Charter School (ECS) has drawn alot of families on the east end that used to go to PPS. The advantage of charters is that they appear to have smaller and more localized administrative structure and because you have to apply to get in a charter you are more likely to have involved parents.
What other charter schools do wealthy parents send their kids to?
I sort of think that ECS is unique in that wealthy parents have been open to sending their kids to school there. The reason for this in my opinion is location. The city could have opened a small magnet school there and it would have been a big success.
I wonder where ECS primarily draws from. My bet is it is mostly local, Regent Square, Sq. Hill, Shadyside and Point Breeze with only a small minority from other city neighborhoods. Would you want to send your 5 there on a bus from Brookline, for example? That would be a long bus ride.
I actually believe ECS is drawing from all over the City, and it has been criticized locally for not being as much of a neighborhood school as people hoped it would be (although their charter doesn't give them any say in that).
Your whole argument is based on the premise that people in the burbs want access to the city's magnet schools. I only think a few suburban parents would find this attractive and most would be opposed to it.
I suppose it all depends upon the suburb. I would expect even in the toniest of suburbs around here, if the school board offered to set up a special school for gifted children only, a fair number of parents would jump at the opportunity. Similarly, I would expect in the suburbs with fairly cruddy school districts parents would jump at a chance to get their child into anything better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robrobrob
If the goal is to get wealthy white parents to enroll in the PPS system I think the PPS needs smaller neighborhood elementary schools.
I have wondered before if certain elementary schools were not consolidated if things would be different, especially in the East End. For example, if Highland Park and Morningside had their own K-5/K-8, or of Shadyside/Friendship had their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robrobrob
I don't think that is the goal though. I think the goal is to educate the poor black students who do go to PPS system schools.
PPS may indeed be shortsighted about such things. One of my coworkers worked for Mike Doyle as an aide a little over a decade ago. They were getting funding together for the busway extension into Wilkinsburg/Swissvale at that time. The alternate plan the Port Authority had had would have extended the T to Oakland. They decided against it because low-income people need transit the most, and they thought by servicing the low-income people in that region, rather than middle-class Oakland commuters, they were doing the best thing. If they chose the T extension, the city would look very different now - particularly neighborhoods in the south along the T line. Mass transit buy-in would be greater, and the city as a whole might have been better off.
I see it sort of the same way when it comes to public education. The Board may think that given it has a black majority student body, it is best served by allocating funds to improving the performance of those students. But the best way to ensure that city black students do better is to make sure they have white peers, as black students tend to be higher achieving both the racially-integrated magnet schools, as well as the predominantly-white neighborhood schools. A mixed-race school system can provide good choices for white students, as well as improved chances for black students. I'm doubtful an overwhelmingly black district could deal with these issues the same way, as student culture would be isolated from any outside influences.
There have been a lot of studies on this subject in recent years, using cases in different states.
Here is one relatively recent summary. These authors are generally in favor of consolidating small districts, but they acknowledge the case often gets weaker as districts get bigger:
You may disagree, but I generally think it is worth agreeing at the outset that consolidation does not always save money. That way you can move onto what is usually the more immediately relevant issue, which is whether consolidation might save money in any particular case, or category of cases (the latter being relevant if, say, you are engaged in making state policy related to consolidation).
The studies I have read draw a similar conclusion in regard to the case getting weaker as districts get bigger. I do consider the audience of the studies, which is school administrators in the link you provided and school boards in one of the studies I read.
I agree that consolidation does not always save money. First of all there will be substantial up front costs. What has to be considered however is making changes for the long term. As late as the early 1960s, PA had 2,277 school districts. Where would property taxes be if we still had that many districts? In some cases the mergers did not make sense. Blairsville-Saltsburg and Ligonier-Laurel Valley are two examples of mergers that should not have occurred.
The Standard & Poors study that I referenced earlier looked at 88 possible merger candidates in PA. They looked at 88 districts with enrollments below 3,000 students, whose per-pupil spending was above the average and who bordered another district whose spending is also above the average for their size.
When the pairings that would produce the greatest hypothetical savings are modeled, the study finds that 34 mutually exclusive pairs of districts could save approximately $81 million, if - after consolidating - they could lower their per-pupil costs to the average amount spent by similarly-sized districts across the state.
Bingo, and this is why it's so hard to improve a public school district that already has a bad rep anywhere in the country. The reason this is so hard to overcome is because few people are willing to gamble when it comes to their kids. Even the staunchest supporters of what you are suggesting think twice when it's their own kids on the line.
Plenty of people are willing to be "urban pioneers" for neighborhood gentrification, few people are willing to volunteer their kids as "urban school pioneers".
There actually are cases in a few areas (like New York City) where rapid gentrification in the last decade has spilled into the neighborhood schools. New York City has a somewhat unique background, though, since it's always had such a huge range of public school quality, and always had big regional schools with particular focuses which draw upon the entire city. So there was never any fear among parents about "the schools" - parent flight (such as it is, there's actually a baby boom there now) is more about cost of living and tight apartment space than anything.
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.
