Who are you voting for in the Dem primary for mayor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

Please tell us what schools you went to

[Anonymous]

Mandani

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding kids who don't speak English getting special consideration: last time I looked, most schools were taught in English. So if the kid doesn't speak English well by K, they will be behind, no matter how brilliant they might be in their native language. These kids will have lots of catching up to do so I don't think G&T would be the right place for them. Parents planning to raise their kids in America should immerse their kids in English. Have them sit and watch Sesame Street or something similar all day. Have them listen to Clyde Frazier call Knicks games. Cab drivers listen to the radio all day to learn English.

Kindergarten G&T is dumb. My kids took the test. They actually did really well on them. We are zoned for a great public and thought it was better than G&T. But unlike so many other parents whose kids do well on the test, I did not see this as proof that my snowflake was brilliant. My child also bombed the Hunter test.

I'm not sure what the right answer is. I really don't like Mamdani but don't totally disagree with him on this, though I think that getting rid of G&T should be a low priority for him and he should have just dodged the question as he dodges so many others.

These activists getting so upset about this because they think they are so smart are just showing how dumb they are, but most of them proved that long ago.

You are very wrong.

I am an immigrant, and my kids did not speak English well until they started K. They caught up super fast. Same story with many of my friends. In fact, I haven’t met a single normally developing child who was really bright in their native language and couldn’t quickly catch up to the same level in English. It’s NBD.

What is really hard, though, is keeping up the native language once the kid gets immersed in English, so it helps to get a good head start there, that’s why I did not emphasize English with my kids until they started school. As to the benefits of being bilingual, you are welcome to do your own research.

And they were likely behind socializing. Which is a huge part of what kindergarten is about. And they are less proficient in idioms, cultural references, etc. You are exactly the know-it-all immigrant the other poster was referring to above - your metrics for "succeeding" are very different than those of many native born Americans. But you are so convinced that you are right and the rules of your community are right, rather than stopping to look around.

Fluently speaking a second language is a very nice to have, but not a need to have. Native fluency in the language of where you live is more important. And again, I think we have different definitions of "native fluency."

Yea. If that poster’s five year old doesn’t listen to Taylor swift talk about Kelce’s junk inside of her then they missed out on socialization and cultural references. Good ole American values

I am just talking about knowing who Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are. Way to oversimplify things. Further proving my point. You live your best life. I'll live mine. Then you will complain about your kid not getting into top schools because they didn't do well in interviews and essays and complain that it's not a meritocracy.

My sons went to MIT and Princeton and have had promising starts to their careers. I’m “FOTB” as another poster calls foreigners.

I’ve lost track of this issue but I seriously hope people are not stupid enough to vote against someone who is overwhelmingly a candidate who wants to work for people other than the billionaire class over a stupid gifted and talented school issue, especially for testing of 3/4 year olds. Seriously. Get a hold of yourselves. There are lots of good Gen Ed elementary schools. Use a friends address if you need to and move on.

Not PP: I've voted on G&T alone before. Everyone has specific issues that are important to them and are free to vote as they please. I'm sure you have based decisions to vote on issues that I think are asinine. G&T isn't a stupid issue, especially when you have a child reading at 3.5 yo. And yes, kids can be, and are already, being tested at that age in NYC.

Yes, I’m aware. I had multiple kids go through the NYC school system. You do not need to test at that age. Get over it. There are plenty of good gen Ed’s. Supplement if you need to (and I found most FOB did- fine by me) and be prepared for other kids to quickly catch up to your ‘gifted’ 3 year old.

Nah to each their own. Too many pregnant 12 year olds with felon dropout baby daddys in the gen ed schools. Lots of 48 year old great great grandmothers (more common than not)

You are exaggerating but as I said above, use a friends address if your local gen ed is so terrible. Or move. I had dc at both gen ed and at g&t. We actually opted not to do SHSAT, and people thought we were crazy. But we found that there wasn’t a huge difference across schools, and we chose schools for our dc based on overall fit. Everything worked out for my dc and they are happy and well adjusted to boot.

I’d rather not commit fraud by lying about my address. Telling people to just move is ridiculous. How about stop advocating drastic changes to public school policy instead? Is the status quo that bad? Have G&T schools harmed the gen ed ones? Would the pregnant, felonious morons there be any less pregnant, felonious or moronic if G&T didn’t exist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding kids who don't speak English getting special consideration: last time I looked, most schools were taught in English. So if the kid doesn't speak English well by K, they will be behind, no matter how brilliant they might be in their native language. These kids will have lots of catching up to do so I don't think G&T would be the right place for them. Parents planning to raise their kids in America should immerse their kids in English. Have them sit and watch Sesame Street or something similar all day. Have them listen to Clyde Frazier call Knicks games. Cab drivers listen to the radio all day to learn English.

Kindergarten G&T is dumb. My kids took the test. They actually did really well on them. We are zoned for a great public and thought it was better than G&T. But unlike so many other parents whose kids do well on the test, I did not see this as proof that my snowflake was brilliant. My child also bombed the Hunter test.

I'm not sure what the right answer is. I really don't like Mamdani but don't totally disagree with him on this, though I think that getting rid of G&T should be a low priority for him and he should have just dodged the question as he dodges so many others.

These activists getting so upset about this because they think they are so smart are just showing how dumb they are, but most of them proved that long ago.

You are very wrong.

I am an immigrant, and my kids did not speak English well until they started K. They caught up super fast. Same story with many of my friends. In fact, I haven’t met a single normally developing child who was really bright in their native language and couldn’t quickly catch up to the same level in English. It’s NBD.

What is really hard, though, is keeping up the native language once the kid gets immersed in English, so it helps to get a good head start there, that’s why I did not emphasize English with my kids until they started school. As to the benefits of being bilingual, you are welcome to do your own research.

And they were likely behind socializing. Which is a huge part of what kindergarten is about. And they are less proficient in idioms, cultural references, etc. You are exactly the know-it-all immigrant the other poster was referring to above - your metrics for "succeeding" are very different than those of many native born Americans. But you are so convinced that you are right and the rules of your community are right, rather than stopping to look around.

Fluently speaking a second language is a very nice to have, but not a need to have. Native fluency in the language of where you live is more important. And again, I think we have different definitions of "native fluency."

Yea. If that poster’s five year old doesn’t listen to Taylor swift talk about Kelce’s junk inside of her then they missed out on socialization and cultural references. Good ole American values

I am just talking about knowing who Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are. Way to oversimplify things. Further proving my point. You live your best life. I'll live mine. Then you will complain about your kid not getting into top schools because they didn't do well in interviews and essays and complain that it's not a meritocracy.

My sons went to MIT and Princeton and have had promising starts to their careers. I’m “FOTB” as another poster calls foreigners.

I’ve lost track of this issue but I seriously hope people are not stupid enough to vote against someone who is overwhelmingly a candidate who wants to work for people other than the billionaire class over a stupid gifted and talented school issue, especially for testing of 3/4 year olds. Seriously. Get a hold of yourselves. There are lots of good Gen Ed elementary schools. Use a friends address if you need to and move on.

Not PP: I've voted on G&T alone before. Everyone has specific issues that are important to them and are free to vote as they please. I'm sure you have based decisions to vote on issues that I think are asinine. G&T isn't a stupid issue, especially when you have a child reading at 3.5 yo. And yes, kids can be, and are already, being tested at that age in NYC.

Yes, I’m aware. I had multiple kids go through the NYC school system. You do not need to test at that age. Get over it. There are plenty of good gen Ed’s. Supplement if you need to (and I found most FOB did- fine by me) and be prepared for other kids to quickly catch up to your ‘gifted’ 3 year old.

Nah to each their own. Too many pregnant 12 year olds with felon dropout baby daddys in the gen ed schools. Lots of 48 year old great great grandmothers (more common than not)

You are exaggerating but as I said above, use a friends address if your local gen ed is so terrible. Or move. I had dc at both gen ed and at g&t. We actually opted not to do SHSAT, and people thought we were crazy. But we found that there wasn’t a huge difference across schools, and we chose schools for our dc based on overall fit. Everything worked out for my dc and they are happy and well adjusted to boot.

I’d rather not commit fraud by lying about my address. Telling people to just move is ridiculous. How about stop advocating drastic changes to public school policy instead? Is the status quo that bad? Have G&T schools harmed the gen ed ones? Would the pregnant, felonious morons there be any less pregnant, felonious or moronic if G&T didn’t exist?

This isn’t that drastic of a change. There can still be G and T but not at that entry point. And yea, it does harm gen ed.

And I don’t think you’re real with the way you’re posting in such vile racist terms, or at least I hope not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding kids who don't speak English getting special consideration: last time I looked, most schools were taught in English. So if the kid doesn't speak English well by K, they will be behind, no matter how brilliant they might be in their native language. These kids will have lots of catching up to do so I don't think G&T would be the right place for them. Parents planning to raise their kids in America should immerse their kids in English. Have them sit and watch Sesame Street or something similar all day. Have them listen to Clyde Frazier call Knicks games. Cab drivers listen to the radio all day to learn English.

Kindergarten G&T is dumb. My kids took the test. They actually did really well on them. We are zoned for a great public and thought it was better than G&T. But unlike so many other parents whose kids do well on the test, I did not see this as proof that my snowflake was brilliant. My child also bombed the Hunter test.

I'm not sure what the right answer is. I really don't like Mamdani but don't totally disagree with him on this, though I think that getting rid of G&T should be a low priority for him and he should have just dodged the question as he dodges so many others.

These activists getting so upset about this because they think they are so smart are just showing how dumb they are, but most of them proved that long ago.

You are very wrong.

I am an immigrant, and my kids did not speak English well until they started K. They caught up super fast. Same story with many of my friends. In fact, I haven’t met a single normally developing child who was really bright in their native language and couldn’t quickly catch up to the same level in English. It’s NBD.

What is really hard, though, is keeping up the native language once the kid gets immersed in English, so it helps to get a good head start there, that’s why I did not emphasize English with my kids until they started school. As to the benefits of being bilingual, you are welcome to do your own research.

And they were likely behind socializing. Which is a huge part of what kindergarten is about. And they are less proficient in idioms, cultural references, etc. You are exactly the know-it-all immigrant the other poster was referring to above - your metrics for "succeeding" are very different than those of many native born Americans. But you are so convinced that you are right and the rules of your community are right, rather than stopping to look around.

Fluently speaking a second language is a very nice to have, but not a need to have. Native fluency in the language of where you live is more important. And again, I think we have different definitions of "native fluency."

Yea. If that poster’s five year old doesn’t listen to Taylor swift talk about Kelce’s junk inside of her then they missed out on socialization and cultural references. Good ole American values

I am just talking about knowing who Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are. Way to oversimplify things. Further proving my point. You live your best life. I'll live mine. Then you will complain about your kid not getting into top schools because they didn't do well in interviews and essays and complain that it's not a meritocracy.

My sons went to MIT and Princeton and have had promising starts to their careers. I’m “FOTB” as another poster calls foreigners.

I’ve lost track of this issue but I seriously hope people are not stupid enough to vote against someone who is overwhelmingly a candidate who wants to work for people other than the billionaire class over a stupid gifted and talented school issue, especially for testing of 3/4 year olds. Seriously. Get a hold of yourselves. There are lots of good Gen Ed elementary schools. Use a friends address if you need to and move on.

Not PP: I've voted on G&T alone before. Everyone has specific issues that are important to them and are free to vote as they please. I'm sure you have based decisions to vote on issues that I think are asinine. G&T isn't a stupid issue, especially when you have a child reading at 3.5 yo. And yes, kids can be, and are already, being tested at that age in NYC.

Yes, I’m aware. I had multiple kids go through the NYC school system. You do not need to test at that age. Get over it. There are plenty of good gen Ed’s. Supplement if you need to (and I found most FOB did- fine by me) and be prepared for other kids to quickly catch up to your ‘gifted’ 3 year old.

Nah to each their own. Too many pregnant 12 year olds with felon dropout baby daddys in the gen ed schools. Lots of 48 year old great great grandmothers (more common than not)

You are exaggerating but as I said above, use a friends address if your local gen ed is so terrible. Or move. I had dc at both gen ed and at g&t. We actually opted not to do SHSAT, and people thought we were crazy. But we found that there wasn’t a huge difference across schools, and we chose schools for our dc based on overall fit. Everything worked out for my dc and they are happy and well adjusted to boot.

I’d rather not commit fraud by lying about my address. Telling people to just move is ridiculous. How about stop advocating drastic changes to public school policy instead? Is the status quo that bad? Have G&T schools harmed the gen ed ones? Would the pregnant, felonious morons there be any less pregnant, felonious or moronic if G&T didn’t exist?

This isn’t that drastic of a change. There can still be G and T but not at that entry point. And yea, it does harm gen ed.

And I don’t think you’re real with the way you’re posting in such vile racist terms, or at least I hope not.

Entry point is a massive change. Thanks for minimizing our concerns.

Anyone can be pregnant, a felon, and a moron. You choose to picture certain races fitting that description.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

People absolutely prep their kids for these tests There is a whole prep industry and tests content isn't necessarily a secret to anyone. Because prep is so widespread, Hunter ES (which has super competitive admission standards) requires parents to pay for the child psychologist eval to weed out prepped kids and to provide more individual assessments through interview/play/puzzles, etc. Even this is subject to prep, because people always find a way around to get their kids into these programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

People absolutely prep their kids for these tests There is a whole prep industry and tests content isn't necessarily a secret to anyone. Because prep is so widespread, Hunter ES (which has super competitive admission standards) requires parents to pay for the child psychologist eval to weed out prepped kids and to provide more individual assessments through interview/play/puzzles, etc. Even this is subject to prep, because people always find a way around to get their kids into these programs.

The Hunter psych eval is completely bogus. Which is why the kids who enter Hunter in K get completely outperformed by the ones who enter in 7, despite having the benefits of the theoretically incredible Hunter education from K-6.

It is basically supporting the NYC psychologist community.

My child got such a low score on the Hunter test that we considered taking them to be evaluated for a learning issue. But a few weeks later I think they got a 98 on the G&T (not that I put a lot of stock in that either, unlike all of the Anderson parents who think their kids are infallible because they got in) and basically repeated that score when taking it again in K and 1 (we had no intention of going to G&T, but figured it didn't hurt to have the testing experience). They have gone on to be an excellent student, and I know many others who had similar experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

People absolutely prep their kids for these tests There is a whole prep industry and tests content isn't necessarily a secret to anyone. Because prep is so widespread, Hunter ES (which has super competitive admission standards) requires parents to pay for the child psychologist eval to weed out prepped kids and to provide more individual assessments through interview/play/puzzles, etc. Even this is subject to prep, because people always find a way around to get their kids into these programs.

People who care about their children prep for tests. Those that don’t care about their children can fail to prepare them and go to Gen Ed schools where they can have a kid at age 12

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

People absolutely prep their kids for these tests There is a whole prep industry and tests content isn't necessarily a secret to anyone. Because prep is so widespread, Hunter ES (which has super competitive admission standards) requires parents to pay for the child psychologist eval to weed out prepped kids and to provide more individual assessments through interview/play/puzzles, etc. Even this is subject to prep, because people always find a way around to get their kids into these programs.

People who care about their children prep for tests. Those that don’t care about their children can fail to prepare them and go to Gen Ed schools where they can have a kid at age 12

Like you? You really have a lot of class.

A lot of people who care about their kids move to zones with great zoned schools so they don't have to worry about G&T as the top zoned schools are better than G&T. But you wouldn't know that.

Or they send their kids to private. Or move to the suburbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

People absolutely prep their kids for these tests There is a whole prep industry and tests content isn't necessarily a secret to anyone. Because prep is so widespread, Hunter ES (which has super competitive admission standards) requires parents to pay for the child psychologist eval to weed out prepped kids and to provide more individual assessments through interview/play/puzzles, etc. Even this is subject to prep, because people always find a way around to get their kids into these programs.

People who care about their children prep for tests. Those that don’t care about their children can fail to prepare them and go to Gen Ed schools where they can have a kid at age 12

Thank you for confirming that the whole point of this system and K entry into it is to provide segregation and self-selection of parent community, the same purpose people have in mind when moving to the suburbs zoned for "good schools". Not because their kids are really in need of special accelerated education in first few grades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

People absolutely prep their kids for these tests There is a whole prep industry and tests content isn't necessarily a secret to anyone. Because prep is so widespread, Hunter ES (which has super competitive admission standards) requires parents to pay for the child psychologist eval to weed out prepped kids and to provide more individual assessments through interview/play/puzzles, etc. Even this is subject to prep, because people always find a way around to get their kids into these programs.

People who care about their children prep for tests. Those that don’t care about their children can fail to prepare them and go to Gen Ed schools where they can have a kid at age 12

Like you? You really have a lot of class.

A lot of people who care about their kids move to zones with great zoned schools so they don't have to worry about G&T as the top zoned schools are better than G&T. But you wouldn't know that.

Or they send their kids to private. Or move to the suburbs.

Hold my coffee while I give up my 1.75 percent interest rate or rent-controlled four bedroom apartment. Then let me burn 65k a year for a decent private school in Manhattan (a far commute from where I live). Then let me pay an arm and a leg in property taxes to live in a congested dump like NJ or Nassau County. These are all amazing suggestions no one has ever thought of before!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex New Yorker and Dem here who would happily base my vote on G & T. Not just because I went through the program and hugely benefited and I believe testing early makes sense on many levels (kids can’t really prep and don’t know what’s going on).

But because the people who want to tear down these programs never build anything new. It’s been shown time and again in cities across the country. The only step they take toward the holy grail of equity is to dismantle things that are working. That’s not a mindset that does anything but virtue signal.

People absolutely prep their kids for these tests There is a whole prep industry and tests content isn't necessarily a secret to anyone. Because prep is so widespread, Hunter ES (which has super competitive admission standards) requires parents to pay for the child psychologist eval to weed out prepped kids and to provide more individual assessments through interview/play/puzzles, etc. Even this is subject to prep, because people always find a way around to get their kids into these programs.

People who care about their children prep for tests. Those that don’t care about their children can fail to prepare them and go to Gen Ed schools where they can have a kid at age 12

Thank you for confirming that the whole point of this system and K entry into it is to provide segregation and self-selection of parent community, the same purpose people have in mind when moving to the suburbs zoned for "good schools". Not because their kids are really in need of special accelerated education in first few grades.

They are accelerated because they have parents who care. Yep, self-selection is the name of the game. Same with suburban publics and urban privates. No one wants to be around feral ghetto kids who don’t know their daddy (unless they went on Jerry Springer, then they may know the father after all…)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nah, Adams was polling like 8% and Cuomo isn't even getting all of his votes; he'd need Sliwa to drop out, and for that to somehow happen in a way that did not turn off a lot of voters by making Cuomo seem like a Republican.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, so Adams dropping out was not, in fact, enough to make it a close race. And Cuomo's favorables still suck; the two of them are both close to their ceilings but Mamdani's ceiling is a lot higher.

[Anonymous]

All of the Sliwa supporters are too dumb to recognize that Cuomo is a lot closer to what they want than Mamdani so by supporting a candidate with zero chance of winning they are basically handing the election to the less favorable candidate. Cut off your nose to spite your face.