The Yinzers ARE NOT Gonna Like This! (Upper St. Clair, St. Clair: 2014, neighborhoods)

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by RogersParkTransplant

Good grief. I am confident that I will be able to provide a good education for my children, even if it means the equivalent of home-schooling them in the summer. I am wealthy enough to do what I want, and I will send them to Pittsburgh public schools. I believe they will get a perfectly good education there too, but even if they won't have access to AP this and Advanced that, they will grow up in this neighborhood, they will have friends of different ethnic and economic backgrounds, and they will learn that poverty is not a problem we can escape by moving to the suburbs and ignoring the city. I believe in being the change I wish to see in this world, and that goes for my kids and my local public schools, too.

I hate the myth of the "good school district" - I know many people cling to it, but I come from a whole family of teachers and professors, and I can't see the school issue as anything more than a thin rationale for white flight. I won't be able to convince anyone who doesn't already see it, but at least I can take my kids out every day and show them how much I love my diverse North side neighbors, and hope they grow up feeling the same way.

Editing just to say, sorry for this rant. My feelings on this are a big part of why every city data thread ends up upsetting me sooner or later. Sorry to be unable to get away from my defensive feelings about raising kids in the city.

I agree wholeheartedly! My kids went to a good public school for K-8. It was 60% Hispanic and a dual language immersion program. The principal confided in me that she had some parents visit the school because they wanted to send their daughter there so she could learn Spanish to speak to "the help." Sigh...

While I wouldn't send my kids to a school that clearly had serious problems, many schools with diverse populations and middle of the road test scores have incredibly dedicated teachers and staff. Typically, if you drill down into the test scores you'll find that kids who aren't in the free/reduced lunch demographic have test scores equal to those in high performing schools. My (now grown) kids are bi-lingual and bi-literate and very at ease with people of all backgrounds. A big part of that is because of where they grew up and where they went to school. As a parent you can certainly instill those values, but if it's part of their everyday life, your kids are actually experiencing and navigating it. For example, my kids have close friends whose parents are more than likely illegals. Some of those kids were born in the States and some weren't, sometimes in the same family, which presents a myriad of heart wrenching problems in those families. My kids have a real world understanding of the immigration situation in this country that I'm willing to bet that most white middle class kids don't have.

End of rant.

[erieguy]

No matter how it's rationalized, the best is the best. Assuming kids in suburbia aren't getting or need to get the experiences described is one's opinion. If/when they get to college, the best is still the best. In this day and age, the best and being the best will get one further if that's the path they choose to take. Whether it's the city or the burbs, the best rated academically is the best academically.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by Goodjules

I agree wholeheartedly! My kids went to a good public school for K-8. It was 60% Hispanic and a dual language immersion program. The principal confided in me that she had some parents visit the school because they wanted to send their daughter there so she could learn Spanish to speak to "the help." Sigh...

While I wouldn't send my kids to a school that clearly had serious problems, many schools with diverse populations and middle of the road test scores have incredibly dedicated teachers and staff. Typically, if you drill down into the test scores you'll find that kids who aren't in the free/reduced lunch demographic have test scores equal to those in high performing schools. My (now grown) kids are bi-lingual and bi-literate and very at ease with people of all backgrounds. A big part of that is because of where they grew up and where they went to school. As a parent you can certainly instill those values, but if it's part of their everyday life, your kids are actually experiencing and navigating it. For example, my kids have close friends whose parents are more than likely illegals. Some of those kids were born in the States and some weren't, sometimes in the same family, which presents a myriad of heart wrenching problems in those families. My kids have a real world understanding of the immigration situation in this country that I'm willing to bet that most white middle class kids don't have.

End of rant.

That's the key, and as long as there is a critical mass of resources which caters to that demographic, there's little to no disadvantage. Even though Allderdice has aggregately "meh" test scores, its extracurricular activity and honors/AP course roster can tango with Mt. Lebanon, Fox Chapel, or any other top suburban high school.

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

That's the key, and as long as there is a critical mass of resources which caters to that demographic, there's little to no disadvantage. Even though Allderdice has aggregately "meh" test scores, its extracurricular activity and honors/AP course roster can tango with Mt. Lebanon, Fox Chapel, or any other top suburban high school.

Yep. My belief is that those experiences are of equal value to, and part of, a good education. I think many people are afraid of anything different from their cultural and worldview. Their fear leads them to unrealistic views of what others are like. Their worldview sees "others" as "dangerous" and following that logic, they would never expose their kids to a dangerous situation. The problem is that most haven't actually explored the schools they think are dangerous and they are basing their decision on hearsay. I'm no Pollyanna. I know there are dangerous schools or simply mediocre schools where kids don't get anything near a good education. But many schools in the middle of the pack offer cultural, economic, and racial diversity along with a decent education. So many people reject those schools out-of-hand simply because they're not in the "best" districts. If people actually toured local schools, they might be pleasantly surprised at what they find - or not, but at least they would be basing their decision on first hand knowledge.

End of my 2nd rant.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by erieguy

No matter how it's rationalized, the best is the best. Assuming kids in suburbia aren't getting or need to get the experiences described is one's opinion. If/when they get to college, the best is still the best. In this day and age, the best and being the best will get one further if that's the path they choose to take. Whether it's the city or the burbs, the best rated academically is the best academically.

Yeah, but the average person gets the equation backwards. For the most part, good schools don't make good students, good students make good schools.

Seriously. Whether it is due to genetics or home environment, it is clear from numerous statistical studies that the vast majority of a kids academic performance (along with eventual adult earning power) is much more tightly correlated with things like their parents income, education level, and how many books were in the house growing up. Smart, driven parents will usually have smart, driven kids.

Thus, the formula to making a good school (measured in aggregate test scores) is pretty simple - just ensure a lot of kids already primed for success go there, and few kids from disadvantaged backgrounds do. With top public school districts this works through having high real estate costs. To buy into the neighborhood as a parent, you either need to be pretty wealthy (and all things considered, the kids of lawyers tend to be smarter than those of janitors) or be willing to sacrifice your standard of living to give your kid "the best" (and parents willing to work hard and who value schooling will tend to have kids who will work hard and value schooling).

Ultimately people who choose to live in expensive suburbs they don't like "for the schools," or who invest in expensive private school, are really only hurting themselves however - insofar as they're making a significant monetary investment in their child's future which is essentially throwing money down the toilet. But hey, if people want to do that, more power to them.

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by erieguy

No matter how it's rationalized, the best is the best. Assuming kids in suburbia aren't getting or need to get the experiences described is one's opinion. If/when they get to college, the best is still the best. In this day and age, the best and being the best will get one further if that's the path they choose to take. Whether it's the city or the burbs, the best rated academically is the best academically.

Depends on what you consider "the best." Clearly, I had a different view than many people. I sent my kids to a school where they were an ethnic minority. It had good, but not great test scores. I thought it was best for my kids and our family, but I'm sure others would have made a different choice.

[jfds]

Originally Posted by wpipkins2

Suburban schools are monolithic when it comes to race and income. Most students are white and middle class no more no less. My children attend school with children of all races and backgrounds. The student household income levels vary from millions to poverty.

Such a wide discrepancy in income may also be a disadvantage, since poverty is linked to school performance. Higher achieving students from wealthy, privileged backgrounds may feel the classes are too easy or boring if the teacher spends too much instructional time helping the lower achieving, poor students catch up.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Ultimately people who choose to live in expensive suburbs they don't like "for the schools," or who invest in expensive private school, are really only hurting themselves however - insofar as they're making a significant monetary investment in their child's future which is essentially throwing money down the toilet. But hey, if people want to do that, more power to them.

Once again, more opinion...but would love to see your proof of this.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by Goodjules

Depends on what you consider "the best." Clearly, I had a different view than many people. I sent my kids to a school where they were an ethnic minority. It had good, but not great test scores. I thought it was best for my kids and our family, but I'm sure others would have made a different choice.

I stated rated academically the best. Other than the academics rating, it's one's opinion on which is best.

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by erieguy

I stated rated academically the best. Other than the academics rating, it's one's opinion on which is best.

Most people base their view of the academics based on test scores. A school with excellent academics that has a population of kids from all socio-economic backgrounds may have test scores that are lower than schools in the "better" districts. It's not a given that the courses offered are academically inferior at the lower performing schools. I am talking about middle of the road schools. Most schools at the bottom of the scores typically offer less academically.