YY switches 5th grade trip from China to NYC

[Anonymous]

If you invite Chinese kids to stay at your house, you'll probably be invited back!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stratification is already there because not all kids are able to attend. The fundraising is only covering a third of the students' costs this year.

Please get your facts straight - I have always understood the school to commit 100% to making sure all students who want to go can go. So whatever fundraising has happened so far, my understanding always was - and the school's been clear I feel - that all kids who want to go will go.

The stratification comes in with regard to parents attending too. Most of us (our family included) wouldn't feel comfortable sending our 5th grader on their own, even with chaperones. So the stratification comes in with regard to parents who don't have the money/haven't raised the money to also send a parent, which the school understandably won't pay for.

Man, charters are such a private, segregated school system. I thought the hurdles and logistics to even apply and attend an OOB/charter school was enough to discourage low-SES families, but this.takes.the.cake. Talk about tale of two cities.

Out of curiosity, for those students on free and reduced lunches, the school would pony up the entire cost of the trip for the student? Or was it on them to peddle fundraising schlock in their low-income neighborhood

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you invite Chinese kids to stay at your house, you'll probably be invited back!

This is a very good idea. Why is not like every YY parent not hosting a chinese exchange student?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you invite Chinese kids to stay at your house, you'll probably be invited back!

This is a very good idea. Why is not like every YY parent not hosting a chinese exchange student?

Most have au pairs

[Anonymous]

5th grade is too young for a class trip to China, accompanied by a parent or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you invite Chinese kids to stay at your house, you'll probably be invited back!

This is a very good idea. Why is not like every YY parent not hosting a chinese exchange student?

Most have au pairs

Chinese au pairs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you invite Chinese kids to stay at your house, you'll probably be invited back!

This is a very good idea. Why is not like every YY parent not hosting a chinese exchange student?

Most have au pairs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you invite Chinese kids to stay at your house, you'll probably be invited back!

This is a very good idea. Why is not like every YY parent not hosting a chinese exchange student?

Most have au pairs

Chinese au pairs?

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stratification is already there because not all kids are able to attend. The fundraising is only covering a third of the students' costs this year.

Please get your facts straight - I have always understood the school to commit 100% to making sure all students who want to go can go. So whatever fundraising has happened so far, my understanding always was - and the school's been clear I feel - that all kids who want to go will go.

The stratification comes in with regard to parents attending too. Most of us (our family included) wouldn't feel comfortable sending our 5th grader on their own, even with chaperones. So the stratification comes in with regard to parents who don't have the money/haven't raised the money to also send a parent, which the school understandably won't pay for.

Man, charters are such a private, segregated school system. I thought the hurdles and logistics to even apply and attend an OOB/charter school was enough to discourage low-SES families, but this.takes.the.cake. Talk about tale of two cities.

Out of curiosity, for those students on free and reduced lunches, the school would pony up the entire cost of the trip for the student? Or was it on them to peddle fundraising schlock in their low-income neighborhood

No schlock. All fundraising was done as a class (wine raffle, parent's night out, etc.) or school (gala). The cost for every needy kid was covered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you invite Chinese kids to stay at your house, you'll probably be invited back!

This is a very good idea. Why is not like every YY parent not hosting a chinese exchange student?

Most have au pairs

The insane amount of mis-information in this thread is ridiculous. "Most have au pairs"? Really? Me and the vast majority of parents at YY feel very cheated by this info. Apparently someone is hoarding all the au pairs that were supposed to be distributed to us, since hardly any YY parents I know have au pairs at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stratification is already there because not all kids are able to attend. The fundraising is only covering a third of the students' costs this year.

Please get your facts straight - I have always understood the school to commit 100% to making sure all students who want to go can go. So whatever fundraising has happened so far, my understanding always was - and the school's been clear I feel - that all kids who want to go will go.

The stratification comes in with regard to parents attending too. Most of us (our family included) wouldn't feel comfortable sending our 5th grader on their own, even with chaperones. So the stratification comes in with regard to parents who don't have the money/haven't raised the money to also send a parent, which the school understandably won't pay for.

Man, charters are such a private, segregated school system. I thought the hurdles and logistics to even apply and attend an OOB/charter school was enough to discourage low-SES families, but this.takes.the.cake. Talk about tale of two cities.

Out of curiosity, for those students on free and reduced lunches, the school would pony up the entire cost of the trip for the student? Or was it on them to peddle fundraising schlock in their low-income neighborhood

No schlock. All fundraising was done as a class (wine raffle, parent's night out, etc.) or school (gala). The cost for every needy kid was covered.

Furthermore, the school guaranteed the cost coverage for any FARMS students. So no, they were not out of luck just because they couldn't raise that money on their own or in fundraisers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:5th grade is too young for a class trip to China, accompanied by a parent or not.

Why is it too young for a class trip to China with parents? Costs aside, explain why this is too young an age if parents can go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Most have au pairs

We prefer the term servant. You have no idea how hard it is to find good help when competing with the likes of Apple for employees at $10/week. I'm so glad this class trip has ended so we can just pay our own way instead of supporting all the poor people to accompany our special child on the trip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stratification is already there because not all kids are able to attend. The fundraising is only covering a third of the students' costs this year.

Please get your facts straight - I have always understood the school to commit 100% to making sure all students who want to go can go. So whatever fundraising has happened so far, my understanding always was - and the school's been clear I feel - that all kids who want to go will go.

The stratification comes in with regard to parents attending too. Most of us (our family included) wouldn't feel comfortable sending our 5th grader on their own, even with chaperones. So the stratification comes in with regard to parents who don't have the money/haven't raised the money to also send a parent, which the school understandably won't pay for.

Man, charters are such a private, segregated school system. I thought the hurdles and logistics to even apply and attend an OOB/charter school was enough to discourage low-SES families, but this.takes.the.cake. Talk about tale of two cities.

Out of curiosity, for those students on free and reduced lunches, the school would pony up the entire cost of the trip for the student? Or was it on them to peddle fundraising schlock in their low-income neighborhood

No schlock. All fundraising was done as a class (wine raffle, parent's night out, etc.) or school (gala). The cost for every needy kid was covered.

Furthermore, the school guaranteed the cost coverage for any FARMS students. So no, they were not out of luck just because they couldn't raise that money on their own or in fundraisers.

Another YY parent here.

If the school guaranteed coverage of costs for any students at all, this is the first I'm hearing of it. If a family made under a certain threshold (I believe the same threshold as is required for free and reduced lunches), there is a scholarship available totaling a few hundred dollars, and that's available through the educational travel organization that hosted the trip. Also, the fundraising did not cover the entire cost of the student trip. While the school has stated that every student who wants to go should be able to go, the school did not provide additional scholarship to supplement the fundraising and that minimal scholarship through the travel organization. It's possible that most of the stratification or all of the stratification is in fact centered at the cost of the parent trip. It's just hard to know for sure given the obvious privacy concerns and sensitivity about family finances.

[Anonymous]

The first year the board of trustees gave $50,000 to cover much of the fundraising. The second year the class did some fundraising and then $10,000 was taken from the current year's proceeds from the gala. The idea was that this current class had more time to fund raise so the other class needed the boost.
To be honest, the whole structure of the fundraising has always been divisive and not universally supported, neither by the school administrators nor the parents.