Kindergarten Waiting Lists Put Manhattan Parents on Edge

[spideygirl]

<p>jonri

As a resident of NYC, I too resent spideygirl’s broad brush.
…Understandably, parents who are dedicated public school enthusiasts and who have been active in their local parent associations are annoyed when parents who have always aimed at private schools but find themselves priced out of them now win lottery places for their kids while some long-time public school families find themselves on waiting lists.

</p>

<p>I find it disturbing that any parent who has historically been “involved” in the public school system would resent parents (fellow tax payers for public schools) who can no longer access the private educations they had hoped for. I believe that when parents support public education by volunteering and other forms of personal contribution, it should be for ALL children (and not just to advance one’s own progeny). This is not what community involvement is supposed to be about.</p>

<p>

In fairness, it’s also annoying to be paying $1,000 more in rent per month to live in a neighborhood with a good public school and then be told your kid can’t go to that school after all… In most cases, when the “it” schools are full, the neighboring schools with a bit less luster are full too and the residents of those neighborhoods get preference over those on waiting lists for the “it” schools.

Public schools are not supposed to be better in places where people pay more rent. There aren’t supposed to be “it” schools. This is a problem which needs to change. Isn’t that “change you can believe in”? ;)</p>

<p>

the quality of education doesn’t just depend upon what the City does. It also depends upon the homes the kids are coming from. And, you can condemn us as elitist, but if your kid enters kindergarten reading chapter books, you don’t want him in a class in which 90% of the kids do not know the alphabet or the names of colors.

Let’s be honest, here. What are people really afraid of (or rather, who are they afraid of) when they want protection from classmates arriving in kindergarten from pre-K and home playing fields which were not level? </p>

<p>The reality is, kids who didn’t get a fair shake at home or in a great pre-school quite often catch up, and can easily pass the kids whose parents gave them every advantage. I have helped out in classrooms where kids who did not read at the end of the K year blew past the kids who were ahead coming in by the time the class reached third grade.</p>

[waitn184]

<p>Wow, I never new there were competitive kindergarten schools! When does this mayhem stop. I had enough with college admissions! </p>

<p>P.S.- I practically failed my kindergarten screening test, but managed to be my HS’s Val.</p>

[BK22889]

<p>^^^ 6,000 applicants for 100 kindergarten spots, 1994.</p>

[jonri]

<p>spideygirl, </p>

<p>If your own children attended public schools in which there were several reports of student on student violence each month (and those are only the ones which were reported), fewer than half the kids in the school had reading and math scores at grade level (despite the fact that teachers drilled them for the tests for weeks on end), etc., then you may criticize these NYC parents for their unwillingness to send their kids to such schools–and to have to schlepp them for 30-45 minutes each way to do so. </p>

<p>“It” schools in NYC aren’t based on the wealth of the neighborhood. They go in and out of fashion. Often, they come about because there’s a good principal and a core group of volunteers who work hard to turn things around. When these schools become successful–or successful by NYC standards–the rents in the neighborhood often increase because the schools are good. It is true that in neighborhoods which are politically very liberal–think Greenwich Village–the neighborhood schools are good in part because more affluent families are willing to send their kids to them. </p>

<p>And, at this stage of my life, I’m not personally affected, but, yes, I understand why folks who have worked hard over a period of several years to better the neighborhood schools get upset when they are told that their younger child won’t be able to attend the same school as their older child(ren). I also think it’s understandable that they get annoyed when a family which has never before sent their kids to public schools moves to their neighborhood (or pretends to do so) a couple of weeks before the cut off to establish residence and their child wins a place in the neighborhood school in the lottery. Moreover, while you may consider it immoral, many of these public school parents have donated thousands of dollars to these public schools to better them. Others have donated sweat equity. </p>

<p>I also think your comments to amtc in post #80 are just plain rude.</p>

[tega]

<p>This happened a couple of years ago.</p>

<p>[The</a> Pre-Kindergarten Connection - The New York Times](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/16/opinion/the-pre-kindergarten-connection.html?n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FG%2FGrubman%2C%20Jack]The”>http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/16/opinion/the-pre-kindergarten-connection.html?n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FG%2FGrubman%2C%20Jack)</p>

[mousegray]

<p>Arrgh, this topic drives me crazy, and the NYTimes just loves to fan the flames. </p>

<p>Many of the 'hot" public schools were once the “undesirable” schools, especially in the 70’s, but instead of whining about it, parents worked their butts off rallying around the schools and turning them around. It really bugs me to hear parents talk about schools that they wouldn’t dream of sending their precious kids to, as if the other children there were savages. There is a selfishness in this kind of complaining, an unconcern for their fellow man (and children) that is really repulsive. </p>

<p>I raised two children here in NYC, through both public schools and private, and I am grateful for the education that they received. Much of it (especially the public) was possible because of the pioneering parents who came before me, who created wholecloth the enrichment programs, the afterschool program, among countless others, and built the school into what it is today.</p>

<p>But it was the city that created this entitled attitude among the middle class by catering to them for years, to keep them in the public schools. The so called gifted and talented programs are an example of this. I remember when my first was ready for kindergarten, looking at a particular school that had 3 programs in it, the top ranked G&T, the second rank G&T, and the ‘regular’ program. The kids had to test for the G&T programs, and those that tested 98% and above got into the top G&T, those between 90 and 97% (or thereabouts, don’t remember the exact numbers) got into the second G&T, and everyone else, mostly untested, went into the regular program. Would it surprise anyone to hear that the top G&T was mostly white, the 2nd tier G&T a mix but still mostly white, and the ‘regular’ was all black/Dominican/PuertoRican children? And that those classrooms in the 3rd category were mostly empty of materials in comparison to the top G&T? When, during a tour of the G&T classes, I asked the guide about these ‘other’ classes, and she waved her hand dismissively at them? Needless to say, I turned around and left, and the memory of those children sitting in those drab classrooms bothers me to this day. </p>

<p>College is a haven of democracy in comparison.</p>

[spideygirl]

<p>Jonri quote:

I also think your comments to amtc in post #80 are just plain rude.

Here is AMTC’s post #67:

Spideygirl who ARE you? What a bunch of stereotypical hyped-up dribble! Clearly you’ve been reading too much propaganda and experienced too little New York. Every community has some of the kind of people you describe, no doubt, but that certainly doesn’t create a full community. I’m not going to get into a debate but boy are you angry and ignorant.

</p>

<p>My response to this was both warranted and appropriate.</p>

[spideygirl]

<p>

David Cantor, the chancellor’s press secretary, said that schools previously had grappled with supply and demand in an ad-hoc way, and that the Bloomberg administration’s approach was fairer. Children still on waiting lists at the end of June will be offered slots at other schools in their district (there are 32 across the city).
…Before, Mr. Cantor said, “students remained on wait lists without a school unless a parent knew how to navigate the system.”

Parents who don’t speak English, are unable to read, are quite young, or who simply lack the necessary savvy to negotiate the system have more of a fair shot the way the Kindergarten placements are being done now. Naturally, this angers people who expect that because they are privileged they will always be able to game the system in their favor.

“This administration’s position is that equity of access and transparency for every parent is essential,” he added. “This year, for the first time, we stepped in to quantify wait lists, assist schools in managing their wait lists, and will ensure that children have a placement offer by the end of June.”
…the epicenter of the outrage is Manhattan’s District 2, particularly the Upper East Side and the Village, where new condominiums have lured young families. The district’s Community Education Council estimates 400 children are on waiting lists at a dozen schools….“We feel desperate,” said Ben Allison, a bassist and composer whose daughter, Ruby, is on the P.S. 41 waiting list.”

</p>

<p>Perhaps a lot of these same folks voted in favor of allowing government to take away other people’s rights, and assumed that the monster they helped to create would never come after them. Unfortunately, life does not work that way. </p>

<p>Today, people making over $150,000 are in the crosshairs to have their hard-earned money redistributed. Tomorrow, it may be YOU who is having what you worked hard for taken away. </p>

<p>All the people who invested in expensive property in areas with good schools better have a heads –up. Something is on the horizon which may (gasp!!!) take away the ability to give an educational advantage to one’s precious offspring, messing up an ability to create that unleveled playing field in his or her favor. </p>

<p>If the Equal Education Amendment is ever enacted, it won’t be OK any more for parents to create school environments which far exceed in quality what can be found in a poor community a few miles down the road (where both parents may need to work, not everyone speaks English, and some parents may not be able to read). There may come a time in the near future where all kids get the same shot, and where the playing field (at least as far as K-12 education goes) will be level nationally. BY LAW.
[Congressman</a> Jesse L. Jackson, Jr.: The Right To An Education Of Equal High Quality](<a href=“http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/il02_jackson/sp030913RightToAnEducation.shtml]Congressman”>http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/il02_jackson/sp030913RightToAnEducation.shtml)</p>

[zoosermom]

<p>The PTAs in some of the schools at issue raise millions of dollars every year.</p>

[spideygirl]

<p>^^^^^^^^^Yup.</p>

[mommusic]

<p>I don’t think money is the issue. You can get a perfectly good education at any school as long as the STUDENTS come from an environment where education is valued, where school work comes before TV or hanging on the corner, where there are books in the home and kids come to school ready to learn, where parents ask about homework…you get the idea.</p>

<p>I have come to believe it’s mostly about the atmosphere due to the peers you will find in some schools, and it doesn’t matter what color they are or even if the parents speak English.</p>

<p>And you can’t blame parents for not wanting their kid to spend 8 hours a day in an environment where education is not valued, and which may even be dangerous (either at the school or en route.)</p>

[spideygirl]

<p>I don’t think it is fair to punish five year olds because their parents don’t have their acts together. I also think it is wrong to judge them. Kids are capable of a whole lot, no matter what their prior preparation. </p>

<p>Are poorer homes contagious in some way?! Affluent high schools have their issues as well. It’s pretty ridiculous, to me, to label a kid as an undesirable classmate just because he comes from a home which might lack an enriching environment. </p>

<p>I personally believe that there is a special place in hell for people who underestimate little children.</p>

<p>As for certain schools being dangerous, safety is something that can be controlled with proper procedures. Prevention goes a long way here, BTW. Maybe the reason why some kids are dangerous is that they are angry, and by the looks of how their fellow citizens have been judging, labeling, and avoiding them since birth, I’m afraid I can see why.</p>

<p>Many parents seem to believe that it is OK to tax the “rich” and throw more of someone else’s money towards less performing schools. Then they feel proud of their good hearts (even though they did nothing but vote to make someone else give up assets to solve society’s problems). At the same time, they wish to avoid having their own offspring in the same classroom with what they clearly perceive as the riff raff. </p>

<p>Wouldn’t it be nice if some of these parents sent their kids to underperforming schools, and spread the wealth of volunteerism, fundraising, and leadership that the more affluent schools enjoy?</p>

[mommusic]

<p>I’m not “underestimating” anyone. As I said, I don’t prejudge kids because of the color of their skin or background. </p>

<p>But when a classroom is OUT of control, as many inner-city classrooms are, don’t tell me there is as much learning going on as there could be.</p>

<p>I don’t want to get into the poor teacher vs. poor student argument over why a classroom is ineffective, but some of them are, and I wouldn’t want my child to be an experimental guinea pig.</p>

<p>I agree, all schools should have the same facilities, books, materials, and so forth. (And shame on the NY public school system if there are inequities.)</p>

<p>Every child should have a chance. And every child should have parents who care. But some of them just don’t. Their parents are immature children themselves.</p>

[mousegray]

<p>Interesting, on the NPR news today, someone from the board of ed (didn’t catch who) said that children of the irate, protesting parents will be able to go to gifted and talented programs.</p>

<p>^^ mommusic, I don’t think anyone has brought up skin color or background here (except to point out obvious inequities that I personally see all the time), but “inner-city” IS code for exactly that.</p>

<p>Of course you don’t want your child to be an experimental guinea pig. I am sure that NO ONE wants that for their child, even the parents of children in those out-of-control schools.</p>

<p>And speaking of “out of control” schools, there is so much reference to schools like this from the protesting parents, but I wonder if they have actually seen some of these “inner-city” schools themselves, or spent any time in them? </p>

<p>Believe me, there is plenty that seems chaotic in even the top ranked public schools, because they are all crowded and really, really loud. To someone who is not used to that kind of environment (a first time Mom of a kindergartner, for example), it might seem overwhelming. I understand that. I just wish that that impulse to protect their child would extend a little further than the boundary of their own family.</p>

[spideygirl]

<p>Every child deserves a fair and equitable education. Life is filled with playing fields which are not level. Public education should NOT be one of them.

all schools should have the same facilities, books, materials, and so forth. (And shame on the NY public school system if there are inequities.)

All KIDS should have equitable experiences when they go to public school. This goes beyond “facilities, books, materials, and so forth”. Kid A shouldn’t be living the private school life in a public institution with an army of volunteer parents (reading helpers, art docents, field trip drivers, assistant coaches, room moms, PTA officers with top B-school MBA’s, etc.), six figure fundraising, and significant in-kind contributions, while Kid B has an entirely different experience.</p>

[mommusic]

<p>spideygirl–so how would you fix this? Take the army of volunteers away from the good schools and make them work at the poor schools? I’m sorry if I seem heartless by arguing the other side here, but I don’t see the point of making some schools LESS good. The school board or the principal should solicit donations (perhaps corporate?) for the poorer schools, but they can’t tell me NOT to donate to my school. Nor can they tell me not to be on the PTA if I have an MBA from wherever.</p>

<p>And I don’t care what the noise level of the classroom is, or if it “seems” chaotic…if test results show none of the 3rd graders can read at grade level, it is not an effective school and I don’t want my child there. Simple.</p>

[mommusic]

<p>And speaking of Kid B–I repeat what I said a few posts above…it is not necessary to have expensive materials and bells and whistles. Generations ago, hordes of immigrant kids got a good education in the overcrowded and underfunded NY school system and went on to become businessmen, teachers, doctors and lawyers. They had parents who knew education was the way out of their poverty and cared that they did their homework. They might not have had a TV(ok, not invented yet) or even a radio but they had books.</p>

[poetgrl]

<p>Nobody wants their kid to be a guinea pig, which makes sense. For example, Barak Obama’s daughters are going to the private school in DC while some of thier classmates will no longer be allowed to go to the private school because the democrats have stopped the DC voucher system. You might think from the above that I am a conservative, but I’m not. What I do agree with, however, is that liberals need to put their actions into the same place as they want everyone else to put thier actions. If you believe in equal opportunities and you are willing to tell everyone all about that belief and coerce others into paying for these schools, then you do not get to complain about which school your kid is going to…because the other parents aren’t “your kind.”</p>

<p>Education is the last bastion of elitism, the last “not my kid” place. But that is really no different now from the days when Albert Einstein was at the Institute because he was Jewish and therefore not at Princeton itself. It doesn’t matter what you say you believe, and it doesn’t matter what you believe others ought to do, ie Tom Daschle, Tim Gietner, what matters in the end is what you DO. Too much elite education has led many liberals to believe that espousing certain beliefs means they are doing their part. It does not.</p>

<p>I think that is Spideygrls point. Musicmom, I totally agree with you that kids can get an education absolutely anywhere if their parents are committed to that education. It has actually been shown the be the #1 factor in academic success. The peer pressure of other parents being invested in thier kids education is a positive adult peer pressure for the other parents who don’t understand that. So, it isn’t just the kids who are being educated but the parents in a situation like that. However, culturally, if this type of focus is not what you were brought up with, maybe because your parents were too darn exhuasted from working 80 hours a week to support the family, then you haven’t learned how to create that environment in your home and you, too, need an education.</p>

<p>If you believe that education is the most important determinant of a person’s future success (this is actually up for debate) and happiness, and if you state that you believe that others should be paying for the education of those who are less fortunate, and if you are willing, yourself, to benefit from the same, then you are part of system which needs to educate the other parents on how to educate thier own kids. It is hypocritical to opt out of this, and yet, we ALL understand why people want to. All of us. But, as Ghandi said, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” That is real liberalism.</p>

[zoosermom]

<p>If some of the money/resources poured into the “better” schools were diverted because students moved to other schools, the other schools would benefit and the “better” schools wouldn’t really feel it because they’d stil be filled to capacity with the same demographic. There comes a point at which one school (I’m thinking of PS 41) has so much that there becomes waste.</p>

[spideygirl]

<p>

spideygirl–so how would you fix this? Take the army of volunteers away from the good schools and make them work at the poor schools? I’m sorry if I seem heartless by arguing the other side here, but I don’t see the point of making some schools LESS good. The school board or the principal should solicit donations (perhaps corporate?) for the poorer schools, but they can’t tell me NOT to donate to my school. Nor can they tell me not to be on the PTA if I have an MBA from wherever.

</p>

<p>High performing schools frequently have a veritable ARMY of parents clamoring to get involved. It is frequently a problem for teachers and administrators. Keeping overly zealous parents at arm’s length can become a goal. One may become Room Mom, and seven others are disappointed (and even resentful) that they were not chosen for the job. Bake sale? 300 dozen cupcakes appear (when half of that would have been enough). A high percentage of in-kind donations are not even accessed, as the schools have no need to look for more “stuff”. Teacher wish lists are fulfilled promptly. So many reading helpers sign up that the teacher has to turn some away. Fundraising nights are places where people drive up in six figure cars and silent auctions offer vacation homes in exotic places for bidding. Middle class dads leave their office jobs early to help out in coaching. Others sit faithfully in the stands like fixtures for every game.</p>

<p>This is not about “making some schools LESS good”. This is about being reasonable. There is more than enough positive activity in high performing schools, and to continue wasting it, while little ones a few miles away go without, is vulgar. These are all PUBLIC schools, funded by taxpayers. The situation is just grossly unfair. What makes it particularly offensive is the hypocrisy inherent in a desire to vote as a liberal while at the same time behaving as an elitist. When one’s vote does little more than cause a fellow citizen to give up more of his money and make sacrifices to solve society’s problems, that is shameful.</p>

<p>

And I don’t care what the noise level of the classroom is, or if it “seems” chaotic…if test results show none of the 3rd graders can read at grade level, it is not an effective school and I don’t want my child there. Simple.

I thought your point was that the kids at underperforming schools came from home environments which did not adequately support education. If that is the case, then the test results may not reflect the quality of the school. A good teacher can be effective with all kinds of academic levels in a classroom (if it isn’t overcrowded). Most importantly, what you describe is a Catch-22, and the victims are little children (and then all of us, when they grow up). Don’t you think it is important for some good souls somewhere to stand up and put a stop to it?</p>

<p>

And speaking of Kid B–I repeat what I said a few posts above…it is not necessary to have expensive materials and bells and whistles. Generations ago, hordes of immigrant kids got a good education in the overcrowded and underfunded NY school system and went on to become businessmen, teachers, doctors and lawyers. They had parents who knew education was the way out of their poverty and cared that they did their homework. They might not have had a TV(ok, not invented yet) or even a radio but they had books.

You know what was very different in those days? The army of parents boosting some schools with ridiculous amounts of time and money, while other schools operate in a desert, just didn’t exist. Parents stayed out of the schools. You went to school, and then you came home. Maybe mom or dad asked you about your day. The playing field was much more level in public schools back then. The fact is, kids know it when they are getting a second class education. And parents know it as well. This perception has a negative effect on absolutely everything.</p>

<p>So…your question was what would I do to fix it. The first step might be to stop accepting the status quo. Then the brainstorming of a lot of folks might produce some answers. If affluent schools initiated a significant movement towards sharing the wealth, that would go a long way towards solving the problem without big government attempting to do it for us. Expections to match volunteer hours at the neighborhood school with time spent at one which has a problem finding volunteers is an example of what could happen. Another idea might be to replicate fundraising galas at affluent schools for poorer ones, with the same team this time filling seats with members of the business community. Principals just don’t have time to run fundraisers, so if parents don’t do it it usually doesn’t happen.</p>