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.
I understand that people may not have kids, so the schools system is irrelevant. I asked this question because I see so many people bash the suburbs as this awful place, and I wanted to know why the city is so great if there are issues like the public school system that exist. The city has flaws and so do the suburbs. I wanted to get the point of view of people who hate the suburbs, and think the city is so much better. When I bring up the school system, i want pro-city to defend that issue. If you can't defend the issue, just understand the city is not the end all be all. You may know that the city may have its flaws, but I wanted people who have a disdain for the suburbs to defend this issue.
I'm know the city cannot be for everyone. There also those who like cities but move out for their kid's schooling (I think I've seen that on local forums here). And others whose main reason to consider suburbs is because of the poor city schools. For those who like cities, it's frustrating to hear situations, especially since at one time cities had much better schools.
But some of the people I know who graduated from city school had parents who were "urbanists'; parents who grew up or lived in the suburbs and then decided to move to the city, raise their kids in the city and apparently did not feel like they compromising their kid's education
I'm know the city cannot be for everyone. There also those who like cities but move out for their kid's schooling (I think I've seen that on local forums here). And others whose main reason to consider suburbs is because of the poor city schools. For those who like cities, it's frustrating to hear situations, especially since at one time cities had much better schools.
But some of the people I know who graduated from city school had parents who were "urbanists'; parents who grew up or lived in the suburbs and then decided to move to the city, raise their kids in the city and apparently did not feel like they compromising their kid's education
I realize my question did not get the debate that I wanted. People like you actually understand why the suburbs are beneficial. You understand the city is not for eveyone. Most people who have responded to this post acknowledge that the city has its faults. I really wanted to debate people who feel the suburbs are awful and would like to see them abolished tomorrow.
Some suburbs have rotten schools as well. Often depends on the percentage of low-income students. But most people are free to live wherever they can afford. Even if you work in the city, unless you are employed by the city, you can live in a suburb with a good school district. If that suburb has rail service to the city, great.
I realize my question did not get the debate that I wanted. People like you actually understand why the suburbs are beneficial. You understand the city is not for eveyone. Most people who have responded to this post acknowledge that the city has its faults. I really wanted to debate people who feel the suburbs are awful and would like to see them abolished tomorrow.
I am sorry you did not find the strawman you wished to debate. Hopefully he will arrive soon.
For what it's worth, I had a GREAT education in an urban public school. My high school is frequently recognized by various lists (yes, I know they're flawed, and that there is no one "right" way to rank schools) as one of the best in the state. I also know people who attended suburban schools who had a vastly different experience. The academics were lacking and expectations were low. Just as the OP is having trouble finding someone who is willing to make the blanket statement that all city schools are perfect, I think you'd have a tough time finding someone who would suggest that all suburban schools are good.
In any case, we're not moving to the suburbs and are not concerned about compromising our child's education.
I am 20 something, single and enjoy frequently going to restaurants, bars, museums, clubs, art galleries, and poetry readings. I cannot drive due to a medical condition. I do not enjoy yard work. I work for a corporate law firm which is headquartered in the heart of a large, urban city. I want pro-suburb people to defend the suburbs when the city might possibly offer me better entertainment and job opportunities that the suburbs can't offer me. I can't afford lawn care or a chauffeur. So tell me why the suburbs are so much better than the city if this is my situation. DEFEND THE SUBURBS.
You're off topic, and I'm glad no one took you up on your challenge. Start a thread about that and I might be glad to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
Well not everyone has kids, so the school quality is irrelevant to where they choose to live.
For what it's worth, I've met a number of people who went to city schools and did well. They had no issues with their high school and enjoyed where they grew up. Obviously, this isn't true of everyone in cities, but for some the city worked well for them and their education. And most cities have magnet schools. If the child can get into them, they're likely getting a better education than all but a few suburban kids. Top colleges get a lot of their student from city magnet schools.
And the quality difference between city and suburb schools may be exaggerated if the city has more kids that would tend to do poorly due to having families with a poor educational background (or interest). No, I won't criticize any moving from city to suburb because of schools, and I know city schools are generally worse, just the it might not be as big a difference as you think.
The bold is certainly part of the reason some city schools look bad on paper. I wouldn't mind sending my kids to a school that was diverse, yet offered what they needed. However, I'd hate to have my kids in a school where more time is expended on disciplining, the classwork is "dumbed down" to the lowest common denominator, and there is not a reasonable expectation of a good outcome at the end of the 12 years. Most cities have a stellar high school or two, located in long-term "good neighborhoods" that never had those problems to begine with.
"Magnet schools" are highly overrated, IMO, in city or suburb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HandsUpThumbsDown
I think you are greatly overestimating the number of posters here who are so radical in their opposition to suburbs.
For what it's worth, I had a GREAT education in an urban public school. My high school is frequently recognized by various lists (yes, I know they're flawed, and that there is no one "right" way to rank schools) as one of the best in the state. I also know people who attended suburban schools who had a vastly different experience. The academics were lacking and expectations were low. Just as the OP is having trouble finding someone who is willing to make the blanket statement that all city schools are perfect, I think you'd have a tough time finding someone who would suggest that all suburban schools are good.
In any case, we're not moving to the suburbs and are not concerned about compromising our child's education.
What you have to understand is, I acknowledge that not all suburban schools are better than the city schools. I realize that the city can better for some people than it can be for others. I wanted to debate the people who think the suburbs are a wasteland. You example doesn't fit my debate because your urban school was ranked high. My situation is what if the urban schools were a grease fire, and you could afford private or public schools.
City schools are not worse because they have less money. The taxes that pay for schools didn't leave a city because people started to move outward. Businesses pay property taxes and since businesses don't have children, they tax contribution is relatively huge to a school district.
Washington DC is a great example of a school district that spends hordes of money and has some of the worst performing schools in the country. Dallas Independent School District, notoriously weak, spends far more per student than nearby Plano ISD, a "rich" community, with excellent schools.
Suburban schools tend to be better because they serve kids from families that care about education. It is probably fair to say good kids/families self-select these school systems and the quality generally perpetuates. The high relative performance of charter schools is due almost completely to the vastly higher "quality" of the students they attract.
Middle and upper middle class families that care about education for their kids are unlikely to choose a city home in most areas of the US because the public schools will be unsatisfactory and these families can't afford private schools. Wealthy families who want a city lifestyle can afford the housing, taxes, and the private schools. But there aren't enough of these families to change the demographics of the people who dominate the classrooms of urban public schools.
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.
