Demographics of citywides :
TAG
Free or reduced priced lunch 34%; Asian 41%
Q300
Free or reduced priced lunch 25%; Asian 47%
NEST
Free or reduced priced lunch 23%; Asian 33%
BSI
Free or reduced priced lunch 26%; Asian 20%
ANDERSON
Free or reduced priced lunch 15%; Asian 29%
Of course, the TT privates (Dalton, Trinity ect) that are overwhelmingly white and rich will still have their licenses. God forbid something happened to these.
In fact, the rich white parents whose kids are going to TT private schools APPLAUD the demise of citywide and SHSs because their kids will not have to compete with poor immigrant Stuyvesant Asians when the college admissions season comes (because Ivy leagues can admit only so many students from New York City area).
But public schools are not just for immigrants, Asians, and poor students. They're schools for ALL. For one and all. Private schools are not for all. They're for anyone whom the school likes enough to admit, for whatever reason they choose to admit them. Completely different framework.
EVERYONE CAN TAKE THE TEST. IT IS THE SAME TEST FOR EVERYONE.
@anonymous Stop shouting. I can read it just as well without the screaming. You are missing the point, intentionally so, it seems. It is the same test, but not everyone sits down with the same level of preparation. And then, not everyone who qualifies gets the opportunity. You're focused on the logistics of sign up because that's an easy thing on which to focus. But it's entirely beside the point.
There should be no "preparation". Let kids have a goddamned childhood.
This is the reason no one agrees with you. We don't want to send our kids to school FT and put them in cram schools the rest of the time. We don't consider that real education.
So, you will lose. At the Ivies, and in NYC.
Oh, just stop. You are actually taking credibility away from your message.
I get that some like the current system b/c they know how to navigate that system and prep to their benefit . . . but the unintended consequence is turning education into test-prep. Changing the criteria to get a broader pool of high performing kids beyond the RABID test preper's is the right policy.
I will also say this. Secondary education and higher education in the United States is really moving away from over-valuing multiple choice tests as a defining measure of educational aptitude. As well, it should.
It's been explained to you multiple times why private schools have nothing to do with this situation. Continued ranting about TTs really harms your credibility and makes you look nuts. I think the problem is that because some people can afford private schools (and I'm not one of them, by the way), you have convinced yourself that you are entitled to a free version for your kids.
Oh, wow, thank you so much for "explaining" to me, in the least condescending way possible (eye roll). A mom in a reply above in this tread also "explained" to me that reason DOE does not push to bus poor BIPOC people into primarily white and rich UES and UWS public schools is to "protect certain communities." HOW CONVENIENT that rich and white UES and UWS public schools need to be "protected" from bussing while the focus of Carranza's equity crusade should be G&T programs primarily servicing immigrant, Asian and poor communities.
Also, regarding the precious private TTs that are clearly so close to your heart:
Guess what: the doctrine of disparate impact is a absolutely a thing and is routinely used by lawyers to go after racist private employers and institutions. So, if Carranza is going after SHSs (admission process to which is mandated by the state) using disparate impact doctrine, then he sure as hell should be going after Dalton, Trinity, HM etc licenses.
@anonymous You honestly sound nuts. I am sorry you feel condescended to, but when you keep repeating the same really facile comparison with private schools, there are limited ways of correcting you in a non-condescending manner. I tried really hard on your previous thread to engage with your stupid supermarket metaphor and explain why that doesn't make sense, but clearly you're not listening. You just want to rage out because the current system works for you and you can't see past that.
I have already said that I can't afford private school, so clearly it's not "close to my heart"; I couldn't actually GAF what happens to private schools, just like I don't GAF about country clubs or private planes. They are not relevant to my life choices. They are things that wealthy people pay for because we live in a capitalist society.
I care about the public schools that my taxes contribute to and that are supposed to provide quality education to all, not prop up a separate system for those who want private without paying for it.
Yes, we all know that in US private entities can do as they please. Except that this is not true: https://www.npr.org/2020/08/13/902335422/doj-yale-discriminates-against-asian-american-and-white-applicants-in-admissions
If NYC and NYS wanted to go after private TTs and their licenses they could. And doing bussing to UES and UWS publics before destroying G&T programs in the name of equity would have been a no-brainer.
In 2016/2017, about 72 percent of New York City public school children in K-6 received free or reduced-price school lunch. None of the citywide schools sound like they are doing a good job of serving lower income families as they are disproportionately serving MC and UMC kids based on the stats you provided.
You could say the same about so many District 2 public schools and schools throughout the city.
If this is a reply to the % of free/reduced lunch kids, you absolutely could. However, those schools are educating the kids in their zone. Lack of economic diversity in a zone is a separate issue. These G&T citywide schools claim to exist to educate the most gifted and talented kids in NYC, yet when you look at the stats, the overwhelming majority of gifted and talented 4yo appear to be from MC and UMC families. I call BS.
Why? Intellectual aptitudes come from nature and nurture, so it's logical that children from UMC&MC are over-represented in places where the school system is/was meritocratic. That's why poor buy smart immigrants win the G&T selection process.
My kids go to a TT private and I think this completely sucks.
Here's my 2 cents:there are a lot of misconceptions about the SHSAT, as I have recently learned. First of all, yes someone needs to study for it as the test questions in math go beyond 7th grade public school curriculum.And grammar is not taught in public schools. Also, there are a ton of free prepping programs that are offered by the big name test prep companies now. Also,the test really isn't that hard for a bright kid who puts a little study time in math and grammar.The test is created so that a kid that is great at math can bomb the english part and vice versa and they can still get a decent score.If every public middle school offered after school free prep classes in 7th & 8th grade then the demographics of acceptance would be more diverse.
I agree with this assessment so much. The insane prep classes that some prefer are completely unnecessary - a lot of the public schools USED to offer prep classes for free in middle school and the schools were more diverse. It worked! The focus should be on fixing education in the lower grades so that all kids get a solid base, those that want a rigorous high school can apply without having spent half their childhood in prep classes.
Except they did in many low income /performing schools. Many either quit the program or didn’t put in the time at home to get what they needed out of it. Because it was such a bust - nyc did away with it.
What exactly do you mean by "grammar is not taught in public schools"? Do they not learn about nouns, verbs, direct and indirect objects, clauses, etc? Sentence diagramming?