Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are we sure it's reluctance? Not inability to be involved due to working multiple jobs or jobs that are in direct conflict with the child's educational needs?
It's hard to define what Boulder is! It's part independent city, part suburban Denver, with a little bit of "other" thrown in.
The research that I quoted says it's reluctance! Also, I have worked in this area for 20+ years and know a little bit about what I'm talking about.
You don't need to tell me to think. I AM thinking. There's always an excuse. That was the only school where there were practically NO parents for the home team present. Many low income people are not working, but on welfare and would have all the time in the world to walk to their kid's school and watch a soccer game.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 12-09-2011 at 08:08 AM..
I would not draw any conclusions based on what the valedictorian does concerning college. That is one person out of probably hundreds in a graduating class. If you include the salutatorian, who probably finished high school a few hundreths of a grade point below the valedictorian, you double the sample size. Still too small a sample size.
An examples of why these one or two individuals aren't a good judge of a school's quality - in Texas a valedictorian automatically earns a tuition scholarship to any state university. So many valedictorians across the state may choose to go to UT or Texas A&M.
It would be more meaningful to consider where the entire graduating class chooses to go to college.
I would not draw any conclusions based on what the valedictorian does concerning college. That is one person out of probably hundreds in a graduating class. If you include the salutatorian, who probably finished high school a few hundreths of a grade point below the valedictorian, you double the sample size. Still too small a sample size.
An examples of why these one or two individuals aren't a good judge of a school's quality - in Texas a valedictorian automatically earns a tuition scholarship to any state university. So many valedictorians across the state may choose to go to UT or Texas A&M.
It would be more meaningful to consider where the entire graduating class chooses to go to college.
True, and what percentage. My older daughter graduated in 2002. My brother was shocked to hear that 90+% of her class was going on to college or the military. That was not the case at his kids' high schools.
Statistcally, 80% of students go to college in-state. When the list comes out at the end of the year for my kids' high school, the most popular colleges are always the University of Colorado, Colorado State University, and Front Range Community College. The most popular out of state college is always Brigham Young Universiy.
Well, it sounds like the OP agrees that it isn't necessarily whether a school is in an urban neighborhood or a suburban neighborhood that makes it a good school or not. So what does make a good school? Here's a recent study that says it's more about the culture than class sizes, teacher quality or expenditure per student:
If small classes, credentialed teachers, and plush budgets aren't adding up to successful students, then what is? Fryer measured school culture in a way no academic before him had. He looked at the number of times teachers got feedback. The number of days students got tutored in small groups. The number of assessments for students. The number of hours students actually spent at their desks. Each correlated with higher student scores.
Interesting article; it really didn't say much though.
First off, this was a study of charter schools in NYC, a very specific subset of schools. Students apply to get into these schools, and are usually (in Colorado anyway) selected by lottery. This is a far different student body than you find in a neighborhood high school.
Also, look at this: The study measures correlation, not causation, so there are no clear answers.
It's hard to define what Boulder is! It's part independent city, part suburban Denver, with a little bit of "other" thrown in.
The research that I quoted says it's reluctance! Also, I have worked in this area for 20+ years and know a little bit about what I'm talking about.
You don't need to tell me to think. I AM thinking. There's always an excuse. That was the only school where there were practically NO parents for the home team present. Many low income people are not working, but on welfare and would have all the time in the world to walk to their kid's school and watch a soccer game.
Of course it's hard pill to swallow to define Boulder as a suburb when there are schools there that are low income, filled with apparently atheletically apathetic students, and Welfare recipients who have no interest in their children or their education.
That's something that defines city education, is it not? So can we call Boulder and it's schools "urban" to keep the prestige that the people in the suburbs have worked so hard to obtain?
Of course it's hard pill to swallow to define Boulder as a suburb when there are schools there that are low income, filled with apparently atheletically apathetic students, and Welfare recipients who have no interest in their children or their education.
That's something that defines city education, is it not? So can we call Boulder and it's schools "urban" to keep the prestige that the people in the suburbs have worked so hard to obtain?
This brings up a good point. There's definitely been an outmigration of poverty from the central city to suburbs. Similarly, at least in some cities, there's been pockets of growing affluence in the central city. In the future, the old city = poverty, suburbs = wealth dichotomy will become increasingly blurred.
Of course it's hard pill to swallow to define Boulder as a suburb when there are schools there that are low income, filled with apparently atheletically apathetic students, and Welfare recipients who have no interest in their children or their education.
That's something that defines city education, is it not? So can we call Boulder and it's schools "urban" to keep the prestige that the people in the suburbs have worked so hard to obtain?
Most people in Boulder would say they live in an urban area. It is certainly far more urban than my town.
Well, it sounds like the OP agrees that it isn't necessarily whether a school is in an urban neighborhood or a suburban neighborhood that makes it a good school or not. So what does make a good school? Here's a recent study that says it's more about the culture than class sizes, teacher quality or expenditure per student:
It is not per se a location issue. School quality (let's call it "performance") most closely correlates with the demographics of the student body. I have no real argument with the "culture" items in that article. Guess where that culture exists? Where the population that feeds the schools demands that culture exist. It isn't an exclusive to suburban schools, but is probably more common.
The Goldman Sachs guy who lives in Manhattan making $400K a year with a child doesn't care one bit about NYC's crappy schools because he was going to send his children to private schools.
Again, let's keep the discussion on schools not on details on how a particular city is urban or not urban
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
