<p>I think there are WAY more safety nets in wealthy areas. In smaller classes, teachers see more. Less students per GC, per school nurse (yes, they spot things, and yes they care), per school physcholigist. Problems are more likely to get identified earlier.</p>
<p>The death rates for high school age kids is much, much higher in areas that are poverty stricken. Many times those kids are not even in high school. Often there is not much in the newpapers about the incident. There was a funeral for a young man last month that was not listed anywhere. Very poor family, and things were just taken care of with very little press or care. </p>
<p>When there is a death or issue in a high income, high profile neighborhood, it can make front page news. </p>
<p>I think it is more appropriate to say that putting your kids in a “good” school is not by any means protecting them from the drug, suicide, abuse, etc problems. These problems exist everywhere. But I can tell you that given the choice, families are not flocking to the schools that have a high percentage of low income families. At those schools, the counseling department is dealing with a whole host of problems that you don’t even see addressed at the college prep high schools. I know of one city school where the issues are absenteeism, dropping out, jail, bail, pregnancy, abuse. College counseling does not even make their top 10 list.</p>
<p>Yeah. I think you’re right. I wonder how something like that could be put in place in at risk schools. Obvioulsy, smaller classes, for one thing, uniforms, for another, requiring parent involvement–just flat out making it the same legal thing as truancy might help, too? I’m not sure. Just a thought.</p>
<p>OHhh, and as this conversation wanders further and further from Kindergarten and NYC, those of us with HS seniors really do know that kindergarten was like five minutes ago in parent-time, and we really do “get” that jockeying for the right first school can make all the difference. I guess the question is how to make many more schools the Right first school for many more kids. At least from my perspective.</p>
<p>I live in a very mixed community when it comes to income level, race, nationality, educational level. If you walk the main drag of our “downtown”, you see the teens “hanging out”. I can tell you with one quick look that these kids are not the ones in the college prep courses of the high school. They are usually smoking cigarettes and look rather unsavory. A lot of them do end up in the substance abuse programs. It may be because they are caught more.</p>
<p>Having had one kid who like to hang with the risky crowd, I can tell you that the problem is everywhere and crosses the income brackets. But every single kid in my kids’ graduating class (college prep private school) went to a college full time after high school with some gap years, but no longer that a one year break. That is not the case in many of the high schools. It is not unusual that a number of those kids are in institutions that are not of higher learning, like jail or other behavior programs, on a full time basis. Or they are home doing nothing. </p>
<p>A friend from the past visited last week who lives in an area where about a third of the kids go to college from high school. The number of them married at age 20 is shocking to me. Many not married but with kids. Not a one in that situation from my kids’ crowds. </p>
<p>Now some of these kids have gotten into trouble with the law, with drugs, with behavior, with mood disorders. However, the coping mechanism seems to occur along with college not instead of it. These stats are consistent in the US.</p>
<p>Well, the problem is that when you live in a major city that has a large population with income, housing, job, etc issues, the public schools are going to have a representative portion of kids whose families have these problems. They are out of proportion to what is seen in upscale suburbs. My brother lives in a nice area of Manhattan but the two public schools, one a high school, the other an elementary school are terrible. He doesn’t know anyone that sends their kids to either school. Both schools are comprised of black and Hispanic kids from what I can see during dismissal. The neighborhood is not one with a lot of residents of that ethnicity; those who live there with school aged kids send them to private schools if they don’t get into a magnet program out of the neighborhood. Apparently some effort was made some years ago to integrate those schools, and the percentages went too far for the liking of those who had other alternatives. So the neighborhood school does not serve that neighborhood any more. </p>
<p>I don’t know what a workable solution is when I see these situations. Clearly, efforts to change the make up of these schools did not work.</p>
<p>Speaking of “counselors” I also found out that Ohio law does not mandate counselors in the public schools. So some schools have them and others, to save money, just have “visiting” counselors a few times a year to help with college apps and so forth. Sounds crazy.</p>
<p>Getting back to little kids and their neighborhoods–I find it beyond unfair and frankly appalling that some kids have to navigate gangs and drug dealers on their walk to school. People in the neighborhood know where the bad corners are–you’d think a few well-placed police cars would fix the problem. If it means fewer police available for traffic stops, well so be it.</p>
<p>About changing the makeup of schools and the after effects, it does work. Though the key is the proportion of good students/behavior to less well behaved. The town next to mine has a split school district of two towns. One more affluent than the other. One is working class/minority the other is upper middle/racially mostly white. The property taxes in the upper middle got so out of control, the parents with kids in private removed them (mostly due to tuition and 10K +property taxes ) and put them back into their home school. The mix reversed, and so did the schools. The parents went on a media (locally) blitz, fliers, meetup groups for pre-k kids, door to door canvassing to make it a neighborhood school that would/could work. Now it was labelled a Blue Ribbon school, has gotten two Intel participants in the past 3 years, totally rejuvenated the schools. So an “N” of one, it can work if parents are willing.</p>
<p>I like that story, because it illustrates what CAN work</p>
<p>cptofthehouse
If a more affluent family loses a teen, there will be a huge service with hundreds of people. The line to get in can go around the block. Weeks worth of home cooked meals are delivered to the family home. The flowers sent go up to the sky. A foundation is often created in the deceased’s name. Fundraising dinners are held yearly where tens of thousands of dollars are raised for charity. </p>
<p>Now the other side…</p>
<p>I have a friend who sits on the board of a certain college. He told me recently of a fight he waged to get a story published about a student who was missing for some time and then found dead in some type of drug den (having overdosed). The student was from a poor family and on scholarship. Apparently, she also had the disease of addiction. The original game plan was to say nothing - let the story die. Now if this had been an affluent lacrosse player who died of cancer in an expensive hospital bed, there would have been a campus-sponsored service with a thousand in attendance. Sad how socioeconomic disparity follows us to the grave.</p>
<p>Well, there are “good” deaths (a valiant fight against cancer) and “bad” deaths (OD) in any socioeconomic group. What’s sad is that some people never have a fighting chance for anything good in their lives. But this is getting off topic…</p>
<p>Or maybe not. Those parents fighting for kindergarten spots for their children probably have the same thoughts in the back of their minds. Understandable. But, what bugs me is that until it hits the middle to upper middle class, it’s just not news.</p>
<p>wow i guess kindergarten is where the competition begins, I can’t believe how tough it is.</p>
<p>I hesitate to mention this (because I’m not sure I’d want an influx of Manhattan-ites) but Amherst, MA is one of the best places in the Northeast to live and to raise a child. The public schools are stellar, the housing prices are moderate, the politics are liberal and the air is clean (well, relative to Manhattan). We also have one of the best special ed programs you could find, and I personally know families that have moved here from NY just for that. I grew up in Queens and have lived here for >20 years. Being a college town, there are a vast number of cultural resources and an endless supply of babysitters. We are 90 minutes from Boston and 3 hours from Manhattan.</p>
<p>My kids are almost out of the public school system (D graduated from college and S has one more year left in high school) and the elementary-school age census is down, threatening to close one of our 4 elementary schools.</p>
<p>A lot of people here work for one of the five colleges in the area (Amherst, UMass, Hampshire, Smith, Mt. Holyoke) and many are professionals. Many people work from home (like me). There are people who sell their homes in the New York area and can still afford a beautiful house here and a small apartment in Boston or NY for the parent who can’t relocate due to a job.</p>
<p>I couldn’t come up with a better place to live.</p>
<p>Hey everyone, is there a specific section I can post about my site on here? I’d just like some opinions if the community has some time. Just wanted to ask before posting it. Thanks!</p>
<p>“You dont have to be a genius to get into Hunter. You just need to test like one. That means 2/3 yrs of constant tutoring for the 7th grade admission, and a lot of prep for the kindergarden.”</p>
<p>i took the test cold.</p>
<p>MichaelsMother, people don’t just want to move out of Manhattan. Manhattan (and New York City) is a great city; New Yorkers – especially the lifers – love it and are especially attached to it. Many people who are used to city life don’t want to run to the suburbs, especially if they have good jobs in the city. And with the economy the way it is, it would be hard for even affluent parents to just pick up and move from Manhattan/New York to Amherst and find jobs for both parents. And a lot of parents aren’t willing to do the “you live here and I’ll live 3 hours away from you” thing.</p>