Schools

Bloomberg was not in support of progressive education. I myself am agnostic about it -- Community Roots, for example, still has a very significant achievement gap between its rich and poor students despite that it has very few poor kids. I don't think test scores are the be-all, end-all, but it tells you something. Anyway, very few progressive schools opened up under Bloomberg. He did open some "choice" schools that were not necessarily progressive by design, but because those attract the affluent, they have become more progressive as a result of parental pressure. I suspect a school like the New American Academy could develop like this.

Parents can also encourage an existing school to start a dual language program. That can be done in a year, for example, by pre-k parents working with the administration. Not progressive, necessarily, but could be. There's also magnet funding, which allows for out of zone admissions specifically to encourage integration, and money for new programs.

A lot of people don't pay much attention to the situation with public schools until they find themselves on the wrong side of things. That's usually too late in places like D13 and D17 where politics and economics are pretty entrenched against responsiveness to the interests of the more affluent regular people. This is not to say it can't happen, but there needs to be a lot of coalition-building and groundwork laid and a demonstration made as to how the public resources will benefit everyone, not just the rich. Families in Park Slope are more effective in a short period of time, because they ARE the constituency and act that way and in some cases, have been supporting their local politicians for years. But the concrete steps they have taken to get stuff done are not that complicated, and could (and should) be replicated.

First, I think parents of PreK children should approach parents of other PreK children.

If I were in the situation, I'd create a Under Age 6 Toy Exchange that would take place at a site located in the area I mentioned above. For example, a playground.

I'd advertise it via business cards, flyers and word of mouth throughout the area for about a month preceding the event.

At the event, I would announce the launch a Yahoo Group and/or use a Brooklynian thread to communicate.

As I felt more comfortable with my fellow parents, I would let them know that "I and other parents are considering enrolling our kids in PSxxx, but we need more parents to make it work".

Then, I'd get all of those parents together at Covenhoven (which seems to be our most child friendly bar), and make it happen.

Whynot's suggestion is exactly what happened around ps 316 a few years ago. When ps 705 opened, they all jumped ship. The principal at 316 accused this group of parents of being racist. Her exact words were "I don't think the face of our student body was changing quickly enough for those parents."

heightsmom, I'm not sure that quote means that the principal accused the parents of being racists.

tate, what is it you are looking to do? do you have one particular zoned school in mind? or do you have a school in mind that would require people getting in from out of zone or by lottery? or are you looking to create a new program within a school? all different, some requiring more advance work with the school, some less. but either way I would think you would want to meet with the principal. so you can tell people that s/he is on board, and also so it doesn't seem like some "project" that is separate from the school itself and its current community.

not to get into the whole gentrification discussion, but I think one of the things that makes it hard is when "new people" don't do anything to avoid the impression that they have just parachuted in to build a new world around themselves. i am not saying anyone has a moral obligation to make nice, but I do think that if you want it to work in the long term, it's a good idea to try to get the lay of the land and explain what you are all about. a PTA meeting would be a good place to start. once you've met some people and the admins know you, you could ask to sit in on a school leadership team (SLT) meeting, as an observer. that will give you a good idea of how a school is functioning, what it's considering in terms of curriculum, etc.

What am I looking for?  I'm not even sure.  My father always worked at private schools so his kids could go to them for basically free.  I also work at a private school, but not full time.  Even with tuition remission or a large financial aid package it seems like every available cent not spent on rent gets sucked into fees like gym clothes, expensive field trips, galas with $250 tickets you're expected to buy etc.  There's also the fact of seeing classmates come back from incredibly extravagant trips and other aspects of the extreme financial differences that makes me a little uncomfortable.  In no small part of watching this actual conversation happen here, I have begun thinking much more seriously about public school as a reality.  But I honestly have no idea what it all entails.  

Perhaps not. The way she emphasized the word "face," and prefaced her remark with, "I'm going to be blunt," led me to this interpretation, however.

Having spoken to one of these parents, I do not think that was what was at play.

or it could have been the difference between a new mcdonalds with no customers and an eager franchisee ready to let you shape what the mcdonald's becomes simply by being a vocal customer, and an old mcdonalds, that already has regulars with their own customs, needs and wants. in any event, i personally don't think it's really fair or productive to engage in this kind of speculation and accusation if you truly want your schools to grow. i would suggest if people are curious about 316, they talk to the principal and parents and make their own conclusions. same with 705. I heard some pretty preposterous stuff about PS 9 before we decided to send our kids there. enough good stuff too that i dug a little deeper on the bad stuff and found a lot of it was simply not true, exaggerated, or very old news. you don't know what's going on with individual parents, where they get their information, or how or why they're making their conclusions. I'm glad I did my own research.

i think what 705 and 9 both show is that schools can become more integrated over time, and it can happen in different ways and in different settings. it doesn't have to be hard. like whynot said, you can just get 10 friends in your zone and show up on enrollment day and see what happens. but it's just like anything else -- the more preparation, the better the chance it'll turn out how you want. not rocket science, really.

of course, one part of preparation is information and along those lines I'm curious to know how district 17 schools are not transparent. do you mean they are less transparent than other district's schools?

this is just my opinion, but i don't think letters do anything. if you want to "do something," you could try going to some relevant meetings (CEC, community board, educations forums like the one whynot posted) and asking for help. "here's what i want to do, where do i start?" don't leave until you get one name of someone who can help you.

Sprucenik, many thanks!

with respect to Brooklyn New School, those preferences have been set for some time. i don't know the history, but i know that unzoned schools often are designed with specific set-asides at inception. PS 133 in park slope is a good example. It is a district 13 school, but its new building was built with District 15 funds on the condition that there be a specific set-aside for District 15 students. once the building was completed, the DOE proposed to eliminate PS 133's school zone and make 133 into a choice school for D15 and D13 students according to the set-aside. the CECs forced the DOE to include lottery preferences for low-income and english learner families, and agreed to the de-zoning.

I'm not up for helping much at the moment.  I'm not joking when I say I literally have no idea what the standard public school curriculum is as xlizellz states is standard.  I don't know if the grade teacher is with them all day or if there are subject teachers.  I don't know if there is a standard or if this differs from school to school.  I would be interested in learning if there are gym facilities and what kinds of arts are offered.  I have been in two public high schools, once to get my working papers at 15 and once to observe my roommate teaching for a professional development day.  Do elementary schools have the metal detectors and x-ray machines I remember when I went to get my working papers?  In the school day I observed, the school's gym classes consisted of the kids running up and down the staircases because there were no facilities.  What is the standard?  This is why I say being able to get even into the building of district and local schools would be helpful to me, even if the students are not around.  

I taught in my district for years.  I didn't leave because I didn't like many aspects of it - but because there are no progressive schools in the district.  

I feel it's wrong to allow whole districts to have only more-of-the-same schools.  There is not a single school that identifies as progressive in districts 17 or 18 -- two districts I taught in for years.

Xlizellx what do you mean by "progressive"?  Do you mean a school not using the common core curriculum? 

I suspect that administrators of "high need" districts are not allowed to pursue "progressive" methods because they are seen as building on both a solid foundation of knowledge, and a strong support system.

To help readers out, here's a visual of the boundaries of the various districts.