Thanks, Danyela. We worked hard on this report, and this is a thoughtful response. Just for the record: I don't believe there are any utopian solutions for the problems in our urban schools (including those in NYC).
But I do think that using a child's address to determine what type of school they will attend (thriving or failing) is bad policy that has negatively impacted the schools *and* the housing market.
Plus, I think it's just plain immoral and violates some of the most basic American beliefs. Our country, more than any other, has shown that a kid born on the wrong side of the tracks isn't destined to remain poor or illiterate. Our public schools should reflect that.
It's not where you're born, it's what you're born. Once the social architect class accepts that premise, the way forward to improve outcomes for everyone (to the limits of their ability) is clear as day. The failure to accept reality and the constraints it places on human achievement is a dangerous and destructive vanity. It, and its true believers, ruin untold lives in the real world simply to keep the fantasy of unlimited universal human potential alive.
Curious if Danyela or or the Available for All folks have read the work of Freddie deBoer.
I won't oversimplify by saying that Freddie is "right" or "wrong". But I will say that anybody considering K-12 equity schemes is compelled to engage with him. Proponents of the idea that simply moving kids around like chess pieces closes racial achievement gaps have a lot of work to do.
In the 70 years since Brown v. Board, we have learned that kids dont learn by osmosis or telekinesis. The problems are far more complex than "put poor black kids in the same room with wealthier whites"
(The commenter Bicker alludes to this issue)
And what is going on with the poor/working class Asian kids who thrive regardless of the purported quality of the neighborhood school?
Getting kids out of their neighborhoods as a system mandate is an incredibly expensive undertaking. Years ago, Carmen Fariña was superintendent and under no circumstances was ANYONE from D4 crossing 96th street!
And we haven't been able to get the city to pony up for OMNY cards for students who receive busing. The city is not prepared to undertake the fiscal or operational challenges of scaling this up to potentially include hundreds of thousands of more kids.
But what if poor academic performance follows black students wherever they go?
If that's the case (and I don't believe it's been disproved anywhere at any time in the USA), then won't the geographical "mixing" of students of various races (and abilities) simply bring down the average level of academic achievement everywhere? And won't the higher-performing students, regardless of their parent's income level, simply be moved out of NYC public schools (or NYC itself) to charter, religious, or private schools?
If so, the attempt to equalize opportunity for the least capable could result in everyone losing. It MAY be better for all concerned to use testing to filter out the most promising black and other students from generally under-performing minorities and place them in higher-performing (good) schools with subsidized housing and enrichment programs thrown in for good measure.
It's a bitter pill to swallow, but perhaps it would be best to admit that some NYC public schools (like some countries in the world) are destined to be hellholes. The best that can be done may be to save those students we can, install strict behavioral but lesser academic standards for the others, and work hard to make some provisions for closely supervised adult work for those not able to climb the academic ladder of K-12 education.
Good point but excellent outcomes (or the opposite) is not based on income but on a host of things, mainly a family support system. You can be a low income family and still thrive academically if your family is there to push and motivate you. It just so happens that for many Black families, this is not their reality.
They would love to be there for their kids but there are many single parent households, working 2 jobs and so on. And often live in substandard housing
Thanks, Danyela. We worked hard on this report, and this is a thoughtful response. Just for the record: I don't believe there are any utopian solutions for the problems in our urban schools (including those in NYC).
But I do think that using a child's address to determine what type of school they will attend (thriving or failing) is bad policy that has negatively impacted the schools *and* the housing market.
Plus, I think it's just plain immoral and violates some of the most basic American beliefs. Our country, more than any other, has shown that a kid born on the wrong side of the tracks isn't destined to remain poor or illiterate. Our public schools should reflect that.
It's not where you're born, it's what you're born. Once the social architect class accepts that premise, the way forward to improve outcomes for everyone (to the limits of their ability) is clear as day. The failure to accept reality and the constraints it places on human achievement is a dangerous and destructive vanity. It, and its true believers, ruin untold lives in the real world simply to keep the fantasy of unlimited universal human potential alive.
Curious if Danyela or or the Available for All folks have read the work of Freddie deBoer.
I won't oversimplify by saying that Freddie is "right" or "wrong". But I will say that anybody considering K-12 equity schemes is compelled to engage with him. Proponents of the idea that simply moving kids around like chess pieces closes racial achievement gaps have a lot of work to do.
In the 70 years since Brown v. Board, we have learned that kids dont learn by osmosis or telekinesis. The problems are far more complex than "put poor black kids in the same room with wealthier whites"
(The commenter Bicker alludes to this issue)
And what is going on with the poor/working class Asian kids who thrive regardless of the purported quality of the neighborhood school?
Edit: is the rekative success of charter schools a function of attracting motivated students and parents? Some type of selection effect?
Getting kids out of their neighborhoods as a system mandate is an incredibly expensive undertaking. Years ago, Carmen Fariña was superintendent and under no circumstances was ANYONE from D4 crossing 96th street!
And we haven't been able to get the city to pony up for OMNY cards for students who receive busing. The city is not prepared to undertake the fiscal or operational challenges of scaling this up to potentially include hundreds of thousands of more kids.
But what if poor academic performance follows black students wherever they go?
If that's the case (and I don't believe it's been disproved anywhere at any time in the USA), then won't the geographical "mixing" of students of various races (and abilities) simply bring down the average level of academic achievement everywhere? And won't the higher-performing students, regardless of their parent's income level, simply be moved out of NYC public schools (or NYC itself) to charter, religious, or private schools?
If so, the attempt to equalize opportunity for the least capable could result in everyone losing. It MAY be better for all concerned to use testing to filter out the most promising black and other students from generally under-performing minorities and place them in higher-performing (good) schools with subsidized housing and enrichment programs thrown in for good measure.
It's a bitter pill to swallow, but perhaps it would be best to admit that some NYC public schools (like some countries in the world) are destined to be hellholes. The best that can be done may be to save those students we can, install strict behavioral but lesser academic standards for the others, and work hard to make some provisions for closely supervised adult work for those not able to climb the academic ladder of K-12 education.
Good point but excellent outcomes (or the opposite) is not based on income but on a host of things, mainly a family support system. You can be a low income family and still thrive academically if your family is there to push and motivate you. It just so happens that for many Black families, this is not their reality.
They would love to be there for their kids but there are many single parent households, working 2 jobs and so on. And often live in substandard housing
The politics of this would probably cut in some surprising ways, other than the predictable opposition of unions to choice.