Kindergarten Waiting Lists Put Manhattan Parents on Edge

Parents Forum
101

<p>Spidey, you are very naive if you think that the army of parent volunteers is the problem. Spend an hour at one of the low performing schools- sit with the 3rd graders who were born crack babies who have severe neurological deficits, and now get thousands of dollars of publicly subsidised aid (speech therapy, reading specialists, a shadow if they need one, teachers aides galore) and you come back and tell us that the zealous parents of the upper middle class are the problem in public education. You have teachers managing autistic kids who have been mainstreamed who bang their heads repetitively for 6 hours a day but whose parents don’t want the kid “stigmatized” by being in a private school- but their lawyer got them into a public school with 30K worth of special ed per year (thank you taxpayers). You have kids whose asthma keeps them out of school 19 days out of 20. You have kids who never get breakfast because drug addicted Mom and BF can’t get it together despite the army of case workers and parenting programs sent to the home to help them be parents.</p>

<p>This is not a racial issue or a problem of limousine liberals. This is reality. Before you castigate parents who volunteer and work hard to make their public schools successful, go spend time in the low ranked schools and come back and tell us about the glories you see there. And all the eager children who are being unfairly demonized by the awful parents across town.</p>

<p>Friend of mine teaches in a low performing school in Brooklyn. She spent most of her last pregnancy on bed rest after having been violently attacked by a 6th grader on her way to the bathroom. Her principal told her (with no touch of irony… he obviously was never pregnant himself) that she shouldn’t be going to the bathroom during school hours since it’s not safe for the teachers in there.</p>

<p>A 6th grader?</p>

102

<p>Which is kind of my point.</p>

<p>I think we, as a country, maybe need to rethink the reality of endlessly acting as if we can create equality of opportunity if we just say the right things and get others to spend the money for these things. I feel it may be necessary to rethink mainstreaming and whether that is best for the kids, to rethink the delivery systems in public education–it may well be necessary to stop SAYING that all of these things can be fixed within the system as it currently exists and start to figure out how to really make it work–for the pregnant teachers, the parents and the students. It’s not working now. Pouring more money on it, as musicmom has pointed out, isn’t going to help, and simply SAYING you believe in an equal education, just not for your kid isn’t going to work. I think some hard things need to be said, and some difficult, politically challenging and unpopular choices have to be made, and one of them may well be changing the way we deliver education to those who are really NOT coming from an equal situation.</p>

103

<p>Well, “crack babies” can be found before “inner-city” on the code words list (if it is alphabetized), but I’ll ignore that and proceed with a constructive response.</p>

<p>I do not think that the only problem in public education is affluent parents who try to make their schools better. However, there is a critical disparity in the quality of education that a child and family can expect depending on the school attended. That is unacceptable in a public education system funded by taxpayers. Some of that disparity is caused by the unequal amount of volunteer hours, financial contributions, and in-kind donations that exist from school to school. </p>

<p>Highly functional families congregating within the better public schools is a very real problem. Communities don’t function very well when the stronger and healthier members leave the ones with needs out in the cold. Casting your vote to make the guy in the big house pay more taxes (while you house all the needy kids somewhere where you don’t have to look at them) is not going to solve the problem.</p>

<p>I agree that throwing more taxpayer money at children with real problems does not solve them. Statistics support that claim. Yet experiencing daily a school which is *less than * does make the problems of children much worse. They have less at home, and then they go to school and it is the same story. </p>

<p>None of the solutions I proposed had anything to do with increasing taxpayer money. Communities can solve problems by digging in and taking ownership of them, rather than banishing them to the educational equivalent of Siberia. Expecting Big Government to solve these problems will only make them worse.</p>

<p>I am not sure about the statistics behind how many kids in underperforming schools have substance-related problems. I do know a lot about substance abuse, however, and I can tell you that it is a very equal opportunity disease (across all races and socioeconomic levels). If you are a rich, privileged girl hooked on the Oxy you stole from Mummy’s medicine cabinet, you get a good lawyer who gets you out of your legal troubles and go to rehab. If you are a poor male of a different race and get caught with a small amount of coke, you go to prison. The “crack-baby born to the unwed woman living with her boyfriend” stereotype is an invalid excuse for why poorly performing schools got that way. There is just as much substance abuse in the affluent suburbs. The difference is that there people have the means to at least wage a fight against the insidious disease of addiction.</p>

104

<p>There is a world of difference between the truly affluent and “crack babies.” And most kids live in that world of difference. Those kids could use a helping hand too. Maybe some art supplies. New books. Toilet paper. Even crack babies could benefit from those things. With a group of parents who know how it should be done to the lead the way, less well-performing schools could see some real benefit. My son goes to a very mixed, very over-crowded school. The academics are excellent, though. There is a large group of parents (actually, to be fair, it’s almost exclusively mothers) who devote a Herculean amount of time and effort in making things better for every child in that school. I admire those women more than I can ever say. They do great things without a lot of respect or honor. My personal feeling is that there’s not a lot of variation in what needs to be taught in the lower grades, absent the outer ranges on both ends of the spectrum, and the kids whose parents are so involved would thrive anywhere. It would be so great if they would turn that attention to making lemonade in the schools where they’re sent. There hasn’t been a lot of building, that’s the truth, but there hasn’t been money, either. I still don’t have a lot of sympathy for many of the protesters, although I’d never split siblings between schools. Yes, they bought their homes with certain expectations. But, you know, sometimes we all have to make the best of things and sometimes we all have to cope with disappointment. There is still no solution if buildings aren’t going to be built or addresses investigated. If they’re this upset now, heaven help their children when it’s time for high school because that process is mind-alteringly awful.</p>

105

<p>Spidey- take the in-kind donations out of the high performing schools. Sure. Give them to the low performing schools. Great. All you’ve done is moderately diminish the success of the better schools and created a cosmetic bandaid for the low performing school.</p>

<p>You have big, deep, systemic issues. But if it makes you feel better to spread around the construction paper so you don’t feel that the kids in the low performing schools are getting screwed- well, go distribute.</p>

106

<p>The disparity in funding is nowhere near as great as you assume it is. Yes, there are a few schools–think PS 41 and PS 6–which raise a LOT of money. But it’s not as if the poorly performing schools are in a “desert.” They usually have an army of volunteers too–the volunteers just don’t have kids in the school. If you’d like to volunteer, check out [Fund</a> For Public Schools Helps New York Donate to Education and Support New York City Public Schools](<a href=“http://schools.nyc.gov/fundforpublicschools/]Fund”>http://schools.nyc.gov/fundforpublicschools/) There are many other sites.</p>

<p>Lots of corporations in NYC have “adopted” underperforming schools. Their employees tutor reading and math at these schools. Many of the middle schools have “mock trial” programs, sponsored by major law firms. Several dance companies sponsor dance programs for kids from underperforming schools.The Beacon after-school program offers lots of wonderful activities in many poorly performing schools (as well as some others). An organization I really believe in runs homework help sessions in about a dozen city shelters–most of them are run by volunteers. There are programs to take kids to the museums, programs to take them to live theatre, etc. There is the Fresh Air Fund to send kids out of the city in the summer and a host of other programs to send them to summer camp. NYC Teaching Fellows, a very competitive program with many “second career” teachers, places most of the fellows in these underperforming schools. They also get a lot of Teach for America kids. </p>

<p>But that really doesn’t help when your kindergartener is in a k-8 school dominated by the local housing project where 7th and 8th graders who belong to actual GANGS and can be as old as 15 control the hallways, the playgrounds, the bathrooms, etc. By the end of the first week, your 5 year old will have had his subway/bus pass stolen. (If you have a pass you can ride free until 7 pm and these are in great demand by drop-outs.) His winter coat will be taken a few times. When you replace it, buy the cheapest possible. And tell him NEVER to go into the bathroom alone. A kindergarten male in my neighborhood was sodomized by boys about 12 in the elementary school bathroom. The traumatized child was NOT Caucasian–this isn’t about race.</p>

<p>**Reality is that many poor minority families who value education and safety don’t send their kids to these schools either. **The Catholic schools in this city are filled with minority kids who come from non-Catholic families who want their kids in a safe environment where there is some discipline. Other minority kids attend top independent schools on scholarship. Some get their kids into gifted and talented programs. (Among other things, the NYC day care centers direct teachers to encourage all of the parents of children in these programs to apply to gifted and talented programs. )</p>

<p>**If throwing money and volunteers could solve all NYC’s school problems, the problem would have been fixed a long time ago. It’s a lot more complicated than that. **</p>

<p>Moreover, EVERY PARENT HAS A CHOICE. The city benefits from keeping middle class parents in the City. If the kids don’t have a decent placement for kindergarten, a lot of families will pack up and leave the city. Others will put their kids into Catholic schools and yeshivas. Others will send them to private schools. Others will decide to “home school.” </p>

<p>And it becomes a vicious circle. The more kids from decent families of any color withdraw from the public schools, the fewer families will send their kids to that school. The public school in my neighborhood used to be among the best in NYC. It dropped from being in the top 5% in reading and math scores to the bottom half in three years. It doesn’t take long to ruin a good school.</p>

107

<p>Two separate issues, blossom. We have huge systemic problems. Chief among them is not the convenience of the parents at issue here. Could it be handled better? Of course. But there are far greater crises.</p>

<p>And those kids who don’t have construction paper, toilet paper, books, would probably be grateful as all get-out to have some.</p>

108

<p>How many K-8 schools actually exist?</p>

109

<p>My kids once went to school in an area where the they did integrate the schools so that the neighborhood school lines were pretty much blurred and there was busing to ensure that each elementary school received about the same number of kids from the more affluent homes, middle income homes and low income homes. There was initially a lot of bitterness about this redistricting as most of those in the mid and upper financial predicaments bought houses based on the neighborhood school serving their address. There was loss of students as those who could afford to do so and could get their kids into a private school did so. Some also moved to suburbs where the kids where more economically homogeneous. This did lead to lowering of property values, more difficulty in selling homes, and drops in the school district’s standings as the proportion of kids from affluent households did drop. </p>

<p>However, in that situation, the numbers did not drop precipitously since there were not that many low income kids, and there were not that many cases where the children were coming from horribly challenged households. In the district next to us that did the same thing, the result was a disaster. Basically, anyone buying a house in that area that was in the better neighborhoods sent their kids to private schools. The school district fell of any of the high rated lists and became a district that needed a lot of help. There is a big difference in the student bodies of the two neighboring districts. The reason given for this result was that the numbers were just big in terms of the kids coming from the lower income areas. When the integration was done, there were more kids considered disadvantaged than those considered middle income or affluent. The ratio alarmed parents who did not pull their kids out when the changes were first announced, and each time more kids left, the ratios were even further changed. </p>

<p>It is believed that if NYC should integrate all of their schools, the situation would be mass moves to other areas and private schools because the ratio of challenged household to mid/upper income leve ones is high, too high for enough tolerance for the situation to work. There is a breaking point for flight and if the situation exceeds that, it could do more harm than good to spread the kids out evenly among the schools which is really the fair thing to do. It is outrageous that there could be two public schools so different in safety, quality, cleanliness, crowdedness, ethnicity, experienced teachers, etc within the same system and sometimes very close to each other. </p>

<p>Having suffered through all sorts of growing pains that schools underwent while my kids were going to them, I have no patience left for the situation. I live in a public district that is considered outstanding not only in educational quality and results but for the fact that it is heterogeneous in nationalities, race, income, backgrounds, etc. However, when I looked at the schools and imagined my many kids in them, I felt that there were problems that I would face that I could not fight and did not want to have my kids or us suffer. Education and school environment are too important to us as a family and to me personally, so we chose private schools and have been sucking down the costs of doing so as a priority in our lives. Our finances allow us to do this, but at great cost. </p>

<p>We did not even consider living in NYC or other areas with school districts that had issues we did not like even with the public offerings just being a back up for us. It’s just too important to us. Other things were not as important as this. </p>

<p>A major reason people live the city is because they don’t want to put up with the school situation for their kids. Those who can afford to do so have that flexibility leaving behind those who don’t care, don’t know or have no choice. Yes, that also leaves some who are willing to try to make the change, but very rarely enough to make a difference. In our case, it was not a mission I wanted to undertake as my hands were and are more than full taking care of other matters.</p>

110

<p>Every family does not have a choice. There are families who don’t care, don’t know, don’t think about the issue. They can barely manage to send their kids to school. The reason school choice vouchers are an issue is that it then leaves those kids in even worse of a sludge heap than life has already placed them with even fewer peers and mentors who can open their worlds in the school setting.</p>

<p>We know a number of kids who live in miserable school districts. Their parents took the initiative to send them to other schools. The kids who go to their neighborhood schools are those whose parents can’t afford to send them elsewhere privately and don’t have the ability to really do anything to change the situation.</p>

111

<p>Yep. Urban flight is cyclic. An interesting book about how the politicians offer change to less wealthy urban families is “Gang Leader for a Day,” written by a sociologist. Short on Rhetoric, long on facts, and details, it really illustrates, from real world examples, how coming in with political ideas doesn’t actually solve the problems, it simply redistributes them into wider, less concentrated areas. I like that he gives no opinions and makes no judgements. Worth reading.</p>

112

<p>cptofthehouse

</p>

<p>Can you explain your position on this more, because it is unclear to me.</p>

<p>Jonri’s post 106 and your #109 both scream out for a solution like school vouchers. I wonder why parents who possess flexibility in ensuring that their own kids get a good education would deny the same ability to others. It is strange that the Democratic Party is against vouchers. I understand that the teacher’s union finds them threatening, but why parents would not see the light is a mystery.</p>

113

<p>I am a Democrat and I am not against vouchers.</p>

114

<p>I’m an independent and I am for vouchers, particularly if they cover the full cost of the educational options.</p>

115

<p>In reply to ZM’s post 108: I may have made a mistake, but I just did a quick count and came up with 23 K-8 public schools in Manhattan. </p>

<p>Ironically, I got a call today from one of the parents in this situation. He thought I might know more about it but unfortunately I don’t. He and his wife have never considered anything other than public school for their kids. There’s no room in their nighborhood school–and believe me, it’s not PS 6 or PS 141 or any other “it” school. They live in a neighborhood that had very few families five years ago but which is filled with them now. The letter they got said that their child will be put in a gifted & talented program, but it could be ANYWHERE in the City of New York–DOE won’t even promise it will be in Manhattan. Understandably, they are freaking. I would be too.</p>

<p>If any of you really do want to give some extra construction paper to a NYC school populated by poor kids, check out this site:
<a href=“DonorsChoose: Support a classroom. Build a future.”>DonorsChoose: Support a classroom. Build a future.;

116

<p>Spidey, there are many, too many, families that have no choice on where their kids go to school because they are in the situation that they are so overwhelmed with other issues in their life that they can’t begin to deal with the school issue. The kids go to school where they happen to live because that is the minimum the law will enforce. They may go to school unprepared, may go sporadically. Then there are those who do not have the resources to do anything more than to send their kids to the district school. </p>

<p>One of the problems with school vouchers is that it requires parents who care enough to use them. For folks who cannot do many of the minimum things that should be done in life, researching and picking schools for their kids are things that are light years away from what they can and will do. That leaves the neediest kids of all in the least desirable schools. The families that can afford to leave that district or send their kids elsewhere do so.</p>

117

<p>

That’s not always true. My kids were in a private school that had a private voucher program (a grant from a foundation). The kids to receive them were chosen based on whatever criteria and brought into the school. They brought their social pathology with them. One of them beat my daughter to a pulp for being white. Anyway, it’s almost always the case that kids receiving vouchers have motivated parents. Those kids are a blessing. Sometimes, though, the process swirls in kids who don’t have motivated parents and whose families never make an investment in the new school That’s the worst possible outcome. Thankfully it is rare. But not unheard of. I still support vouchers.</p>

<p>Back to the original topic: what does anyone see as the solution to the kindergarten situation right now?</p>

118

<p>Zooser, there isn’t a good solution. That’s why the problem. The FAIR solution would be to have schools that are not neighborhood schools and have each of the represent the population of Manhattan at large. That way the schools will be just about equal in terms of the type of parents, kids, etc. </p>

<p>That would not work because folks would not support it. Those who bought into a school that is their neighborhood school would scream even louder, and too many folks who can would pull their kids. I’ve seen that happens. The move I suggest only works when the resulting distribution is tolerable for enough people involved that it doesn’t sink the school system. In NYC, that is not the case. The only thing that is keeping some kids in the public schools is the fact that there are some school districts that the parents find all right for their kids even if they could send them elsewhere.</p>

119

<p>There are options out there for low income families who have kids that are considered “gifted”, but that usually requires parents involved in their kids’ education. As Jonri states in her post, it’s not just the high income parents who object to a lousy school and refuse to put up with it. THat is actually what makes a school worse since the families and kids that make a school good are the ones who will not put up with a sub par school and their flight just brings the standards down even lower.</p>

120

<p>The kids don’t have to be gifted. The Catholic school system has become a haven for low-income NYC families. Here is a link to a school that attracts many such families. [St</a>. James School, Catholic Values. Manhattan, NY.](<a href=“http://www.stjamesmanhattan.org/html/tuition_and_programs.html]St”>http://www.stjamesmanhattan.org/html/tuition_and_programs.html)</p>

<p>The tuition is a lot for such families, but far lower than private schools. It also gives a fair number of scholarships. (It’s 'matched" with a wealthier Catholic parish. Members of that congregation help it both financially and by volunteering.) </p>

<p>A lot of the families don’t live anywhere near St. James. Instead, parents, especially single parents, work in the neighborhood. The school offers an extended day which makes life a lot easier, especially for single parents.</p>

<p>I am also aware of a “Christian School” using “Commonwealth methods.” In translation, that means that most of the kids come from families who immigrated to the US from former British colonies. All of its students are black. Very few were born in the US. These parents aren’t willing to put up with conditions in some of the public schools either. Classes are large. Textbooks are old, but the kids are well-disciplined and all of the parents have big dreams for their kids. The kids wear uniforms to prevent undo emphasis on fashion.</p>