GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

The reality of NYC education over the past 40 years is far worse that Liu’s report indicates. 

A real measure would require a tabulation of the education level of adults who were born and raised in New York, not those currently living here.  Among those currently living here, NYC is below average in HS and college graduates but far above average in those with graduate degrees.

Unfortunately, the Census Bureau only asks what state you were born in, not what city.  But even at that, I’ll be if the data could be cross-tabulated for those born in NY State vs those who moved in from other states and abroad, you’d see a big difference.  Even among HS graduates in skilled trades, NY has relied on immigrants.

Just remember, spending, particularly on teachers, is now very high here.  And it is and was high in the way the UFT decided was most important — retirement.  In theory, that ought to make the schools much better, right?  More important than facilities, class sizes, and cash pay.  We’ll see.  Regardless, there is no going back. 

The link to the Juan Gonzalez piece is garbled: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/new-york-city-specialized-high-schools-admission-test-a-tool-affluent-residents-buy-children-elite-public-schools-article-1.1170080

I’m usually a fan of his, but this is not his best piece of thinking. Stuy is 30% reduced/free lunch eligible; Bronx Science 35%; Tech 50%. The students come overwhelmingly from middle and working-class outer borough neighborhoods. He doesn’t provide any evidence that these schools are primarily for the affluent. In fact, I read Tom Allon’s plans for reforming admission to Stuy as a dog whistle to the parents of those District 2 and 3 kids who are just brilliantly unique and special and it’s really not fair that they are being measured only by a single crude and quotidian exam that they seem to be having a hell of a lot of trouble passing.

The push should be to improve K-8 education, and to stop the destruction (although it’s probably too late) of the large comprehensive neighborhood high schools that have deep course offerings, tons of teams and clubs and sports, good facilities, etc.  

My reaction exactly.  Read charitably, it’s a rant against the insanity surrounding the test. I certainly feel the same way.  But to say the test is “rigged” is both going too far and not far enough.  It’s certainly “rigged” in all the obvious senses that offend fairness and decency.  It rewards students whose parents can better afford tutoring.  It encourages bad behavior by rewarding the parents who are least reticent about cramming nonstop test-prep down their kids’ throats.  In the most basic sense, it also rewards kids who are already the luckiest, because they’re naturally smarter and/or had good educational environments from infancy through middle school.  Basically, it amplifies a lot of things that are just unfair about life.  Yeah, I get that. 

But does Gonzales think that an admissions system that takes multiple factors into account and involves some measure of discretion will be less “rigged”?  Even if a system like that could be administered fairly, can you imagine the fear and loathing (of corruption, favoritism, nepotism, you name it) it would create among parents and students?  And of course there can be no “fair” admissions process.  Selective high schools are inherently unfair, because they effect an unequal distribution of educational resources.  Any arguments about the process are just fights over the rationale by which those resources should be unequally distributed.  

And that’s leaving aside the undertone of whites, Blacks, and Hispanics all becoming very annoyed that a bunch of Asians are playing this game so well. 

For those falling into the usual trap of assuming that the NAACP-LDF compalint alleges bias in the TEST, please read the complaint.  The test itself is not rigged nor biased; instead, access to the necessary prepatory courses is the problem.  If you can afford the prep courses, your child is likely to succeed in passing the exam (similar to SAT prep and success).  If not, you’re left to your own devices or the scant amount of scholarships available to pay for the exam prep.  LDF is making the case that other metrics should therefore be used to determine admission, like other specialized schools in the city (e.g., Laguardia), ensuring equity in access.
More, the enrollment of Black and latino students at these schools has fallen through the floor over the past decade.  I doubt seriously that there’s been dramatic genetic change in Black and latino cognition in 10 years (read: sarcasm).  Instead, we know that Bx Science and Stuy have eliminated the Discover program, which dates back to the 1970′s and was a major reason why we saw much higher rates of enrollment of Black and latino students in the past. Something must also be said about the surge in the south and east Asian populations in NYC over the past few decades; population growth matters too.  There is also the 2007 Supreme Court decision that stipulated that the city may no longer use race as a factor in specialized high school admission.
Remember that while these schools may be specialized and our most elite, they are still PUBLIC schools.  Not being able to afford test prep should not cost you access to quality PUBLIC services.

That’s how the elite private schools have chosen to handle this issue, although of course there’s nothing written down anywhere and “the number” is smaller than 25%.  

It hasn’t been my impression that Asian students are underrepresented at the elite privates.  But I don’t imagine there’s any reliable published info that would verify or debunk that.