Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting insight from a woman who attended Stuyvesant:
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/03/stuyvesant-high-schools-chronic-lack-black-students/585349/

"The city has expanded efforts to inform more students about the test, and provide preparatory tutoring for them,"

that's all the can be done it's up to the students and parents to decide how much work and effort they want to put in now

"Miller says that she was the only student in her majority-Latino middle school who planned to take the selective high-school placement test. Many of her fellow students didn’t know about it, she says. The city has expanded efforts to inform more students about the test, and provide preparatory tutoring for them, but the needle still has not moved on black enrollment. Miller isn’t sure that getting rid of the test altogether is a good idea, but she is concerned that the test can be gamed. She took a prep course, and she heard of several other people who took three or four. Some students can learn how to take the test and get a leg up; others think the odds are so stacked against them that it isn’t even worth it to try."

this is like saying some AAU players cheat becaseu they practice more bball while non-aau players are just playing pickup and not really putting in that work.

+1 my DC's soccer team practices 2x/week. The other teams practice 1x/week. My DC's soccer team didn't lose a single game last year. I guess they gamed the system so they don't really deserve the division championship.

It doesn't mean your kid is better, just means he had better coaching. If each child had the same opportunities as your son then it would be equal.

Then they should make that opportunity, just like the coaches and parents did for my son and his team. They all had the same opportunities, they just didn't do it.

Never said they were better. Just said that they practiced more and won the championship. Does that mean they gamed the system like these kids who studied more?

Since when is studying and preparing for a test considered gaming the system? If your kid had a test wouldn't you want your kid to study and prepare for it?

I sincerely hope you are someday able to realize that this isn't true. I can't think of several reasons a team couldn't practice more than once a week: their coach couldn't take off work more than one day; they weren't able to pay for the use of the field/facility for more than one day; the children on the team had parents who both worked and couldn't get their kids there more than one day; the equipment the team used couldn't take the beating of twice-weekly practices; the kids were all FARMS kids and were literally too hungry to practice more than once a week; I could go on. Saying that two teams of kids of the same age playing the same sport are starting from the same point and have the same opportunities is so unbelievably myopic. Yes, working hard and being focused on achieving a goal is something that should be applauded, but thinking that everyone starts from the same starting point and has the same opportunities along the way is woefully misguided.

Testing all public PreK kids for the Gifted & Talented program would go a long way in getting more AA and Latino/a students into the G&T program. This article makes the case for universal testing. I am guessing that the City won't do this because so many students would qualify, if would force the DOE to expand the program (there are already more qualified students than there are G&T seats):

"NYC can afford to test all students for gifted classes. So why won’t Mayor de Blasio do it?"

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/ny-electeds-1-million-gifted-test-push-20190428-zo37xrr5xrf4rmnhpdplwrma3m-story.html

Anonymous wrote:Asian American from NYC here. I was a child of a poor Asian immigrants. Our family prioritized education over anything else. We lived in the suburbs but I had many friends from Stuy, Brooklyn Tech and Bronx Science. The public magnets attract the smart Asians. Smart whites often attend private.

We now have a seven figure income and our kids attend public. In our affluent DMV neighborhood, I also see rich smart whites most sending their kids to private. Many Asians still send their kids to public even if they can easily afford private.

Lots of smart whites at Hunter, which as someone pointed out upthread, is the school for the kids of white NYU, Columbia and Barnard professors and other NYC "intelligentsia."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like sour grapes. If people aren't willing to go above and beyond what is taught in schools, why should they be admitted to a rigorous program like this? Don't they know that their kid is going to have to do a ton of outside of school work? If they cannot be bothered to help their kids prep for one test, what do they think will happen when the workload piles up?

The other thing that not have been mentioned is many of these Asian parents spend every spare dollar on their kids. Many low income first generation parents don’t go out to eat or to the movies but will happily throw down the $1,500 for Princeton review classes etc. it’s that level of sacrifice that also weighs heavily but also makes the kids feel so supported and loved (and a little guilty) so they often work hard.

My parents couldn’t afford the prep classes. I studied on my own. I studied hard because I hated being poor.

The major difference is that Asians view education as their ticket out of poverty.

Did you read Michelle obama’s Book? Michelle Obama’s parents sound similar to many Asian American parents except her mom stayed home. Immigrant families in nyc require 2 incomes to live and eat. I believe African immigrant families value education the way asian Americans do. I have seen them at kumon. My very American UMC asian American child quit kumon because he hated it. He does not and will never know the feeling of studying to get out of poverty.

Asian American from NYC here. I was a child of a poor Asian immigrants. Our family prioritized education over anything else. We lived in the suburbs but I had many friends from Stuy, Brooklyn Tech and Bronx Science. The public magnets attract the smart Asians. Smart whites often attend private.

We now have a seven figure income and our kids attend public. In our affluent DMV neighborhood, I also see rich smart whites most sending their kids to private. Many Asians still send their kids to public even if they can easily afford private.

How many Black Kids get picked for the Draft for professional sports?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^BTW, the people involved in the campaign are very interesting.

"The public face of the campaign, the Rev. Kirsten John Foy, whose civil rights organization is receiving a contribution for its involvement, is a prominent minister and a Sharpton ally. The campaign is planning to spend at least $1 million on advertisements alone. Neither the website nor the ads bear any mention of Mr. Lauder or Mr. Parsons."

I really hope they put some focus and energy into Elementary school education. Why do so many AA students in Grades 3-5 score 1s and 2s on the ELA and Math tests? Tracking and expanding the G&T would help but it's not enough. Elementary is where the problem starts, not at the end point with the SHSAT test.

It starts before elementary. Learning begins in infancy.

OK, but I'm speaking in terms of what the NYC DOE can do. They have created free 3K (free public pre-Kindergarten for 3 year olds) and expanded PreK (free public pre-Kindergarten for 4 year olds). They are working on diversity plans for Middle School, piloting program changes in two districts. And now they are trying to get rid of the High School SHSAT test. But nothing in their policy proposals addresses Elementary school. It's a very strange omission.

Anonymous wrote:^^BTW, the people involved in the campaign are very interesting.

"The public face of the campaign, the Rev. Kirsten John Foy, whose civil rights organization is receiving a contribution for its involvement, is a prominent minister and a Sharpton ally. The campaign is planning to spend at least $1 million on advertisements alone. Neither the website nor the ads bear any mention of Mr. Lauder or Mr. Parsons."

I really hope they put some focus and energy into Elementary school education. Why do so many AA students in Grades 3-5 score 1s and 2s on the ELA and Math tests? Tracking and expanding the G&T would help but it's not enough. Elementary is where the problem starts, not at the end point with the SHSAT test.

It starts before elementary. Learning begins in infancy.

Hunter high should be 50% urm, then you can touch stuy

^^BTW, the people involved in the campaign are very interesting.

"The public face of the campaign, the Rev. Kirsten John Foy, whose civil rights organization is receiving a contribution for its involvement, is a prominent minister and a Sharpton ally. The campaign is planning to spend at least $1 million on advertisements alone. Neither the website nor the ads bear any mention of Mr. Lauder or Mr. Parsons."

I really hope they put some focus and energy into Elementary school education. Why do so many AA students in Grades 3-5 score 1s and 2s on the ELA and Math tests? Tracking and expanding the G&T would help but it's not enough. Elementary is where the problem starts, not at the end point with the SHSAT test.

Big Money Enters Debate Over Race and Admissions at Stuyvesant

Ronald Lauder and Richard Parsons want to keep the test for New York City’s elite schools, favoring other ways to increase the number of black and Hispanic students.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/27/nyregion/specialized-high-schools-lobbying.html

They are lobbying to keep the test, but they "are championing a range of educational ideas that include more gifted and talented programs, more test preparation, better middle schools and more elite high schools. Mr. de Blasio’s administration, on the other hand, is skeptical of high-stakes testing and academic tracking in the school system."