NYC public schools revamp Gifted & Talented, eliminate testing

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,801
Reputation
19,581
Daps
202,223
Reppin
the ether
Technically, can't the same things you're saying about those Asian "low to middle income" immigrants be said about their counterparts from other regions/countries of the world?
Why do those Asian immigrants outperform other immigrants academically?

They don't. Immigrants from nations outside of east asia also produce strong results when their numbers are limited to the elite.

Nigerian immigrants do fantastically well in Western nations even though Nigeria and China are worlds apart culturally. Indians shouldn't even be grouped with Koreans as "asian", they have nothing in common culturally and their own national education systems are polar opposites, yet the Indian elite performs just as well here as the Korean elite. Australian and South African immigrants do very very well too, even though you'd never confuse their national cultures or governments for Japanese.

In every country that has a strong national elite, where that elite is the main one that immigrates, their immigrants do well.




Of course, there are other nations where the immigrant populations are much more diverse and actually represent the bulk of their home populations - Laotians, Cambodians, Samoans, Somalis, Sudanese, Haitians, and virtually all of Latin America. And - big surprise - those groups are all seen as "low achieving" compared to the "model minority" populations that are made up of a mix of hand-picked and self-selected elites. Back in the day the same was true of virtually every White population that imported primarily laborers - Irish, Eastern Europeans, even the Germans and Chinese were all seen as intellectually inferior when refugees and laborers were the main ones coming in.

I won't deny that you can build a pro-education culture. And if your community promotes education that will be helpful for producing academic results (though if it does it in the wrong manner for the wrong reasons, it will often cause new problems). The issue is that those cultural arguments don't explain the vast majority of the discrepancies we see. India, Indonesia, and the Philippines have famously AWFUL education systems, among the very worst of any middle-income nations. Thailand is only marginally better. Yet here they're all seen as "model minorities" and their educational culture is raved about. It's pure ignorance that becomes obvious once you educate yourself on their systems and education history.
 
Last edited:

get these nets

Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
53,009
Reputation
14,319
Daps
199,861
Reppin
Above the fray.
@Rhakim

Thread is about NYC public schools, so let me put up the most recent DOE stats that are relevant to the topic.
-----
In a school system whose total enrollment, according to the DOE's 2019-2020 data, is 41% Latino, 22% Black, 18% Asian and 15% white, the specialized high schools have grown disproportionately Asian and white over the past years.

At Stuyvesant High School, only 8 Black students and 20 Latino students out of 750 admitted students got in for this fall, compared to 493 Asian students and 152 white students, according to DOE data. At Brooklyn Tech, the country’s biggest high school, 64 Black students and 76 Latino students were admitted out of 1,607 freshman seats, while 844 Asian students and 499 white students were admitted. One Black student and 7 Latino students were admitted to Staten Island Tech out of 281 seats.

SHSchart.png

DOE
-----

No data on how many generations the student's families have been here. I imagine a great deal of them are 3rd generation Americans( outside of the ones who are AA or Original Nations).

NYC has a significant Black immigrant and descent population going back a century.

Asian students are disproportionately represented in the specialized public high schools. In a city FULL of immigrants from all over the world.

People have juelzed and deflected about this topic for years, but it is what it is.
 
Last edited:

chineebai

Superstar
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
10,979
Reputation
896
Daps
29,743
Reppin
NULL
@Rhakim

Thread is about NYC public schools, so let me put up the most recent DOE stats that are relevant to the topic.
-----
In a school system whose total enrollment, according to the DOE's 2019-2020 data, is 41% Latino, 22% Black, 18% Asian and 15% white, the specialized high schools have grown disproportionately Asian and white over the past years.

At Stuyvesant High School, only 8 Black students and 20 Latino students out of 750 admitted students got in for this fall, compared to 493 Asian students and 152 white students, according to DOE data. At Brooklyn Tech, the country’s biggest high school, 64 Black students and 76 Latino students were admitted out of 1,607 freshman seats, while 844 Asian students and 499 white students were admitted. One Black student and 7 Latino students were admitted to Staten Island Tech out of 281 seats.

SHSchart.png

DOE
-----

No data on how many generations the student's families have been here. I imagine a great deal of them are 3rd generation Americans( outside of the ones who are AA or Original Nations).

NYC has a significant Black immigrant and descent population going back a century.

Asian students are disproportionately represented in the specialized public high schools. In a city FULL of immigrants from all over the world.

People have juelzed and deflected about this topic for years, but it is what it is.

There are a lot of free resources to study for shsat but if you're not studious from the start, it's very difficult to compete with people that have been studying since they were in kindergarten. I know a lot of people that went to the specialize schools and being that my junior high school was on the lower east side, it was mostly students from poor families where their parents didn't even speak english. I really do think it's about instilling that mentality when they're young.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,801
Reputation
19,581
Daps
202,223
Reppin
the ether
@Rhakim

Thread is about NYC public schools, so let me put up the most recent DOE stats that are relevant to the topic.
-----
In a school system whose total enrollment, according to the DOE's 2019-2020 data, is 41% Latino, 22% Black, 18% Asian and 15% white, the specialized high schools have grown disproportionately Asian and white over the past years.

At Stuyvesant High School, only 8 Black students and 20 Latino students out of 750 admitted students got in for this fall, compared to 493 Asian students and 152 white students, according to DOE data. At Brooklyn Tech, the country’s biggest high school, 64 Black students and 76 Latino students were admitted out of 1,607 freshman seats, while 844 Asian students and 499 white students were admitted. One Black student and 7 Latino students were admitted to Staten Island Tech out of 281 seats.

SHSchart.png

DOE
-----

No data on how many generations the student's families have been here. I imagine a great deal of them are 3rd generation Americans( outside of the ones who are AA or Original Nations).

NYC has a significant Black immigrant and descent population going back a century.

Asian students are disproportionately represented in the specialized public high schools. In a city FULL of immigrants from all over the world.

People have juelzed and deflected about this topic for years, but it is what it is.



None of that is a counter to what I said at all. This feels like one of those Ben Shapiro arguments where he just repeats all the statistics that shows Black folk are disadvantaged while completely ignoring the factors that lead to it even when they're right in his face.


I know we ain't gonna see eye-to-eye on this. In our past disagreements you've :cape: for standardized tests and tiered schooling systems even when they clearly disadvantage black children. Not to mention your support for police state, mass incarceration, landlord evictions, and rich people in general. We clearly have different allegiances and are fighting for different communities.

At least try and deal with the points I made instead of just repeating yourself. We already know who you'll support, but what's your case for it?
 

get these nets

Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
53,009
Reputation
14,319
Daps
199,861
Reppin
Above the fray.
None of that is a counter to what I said at all. This feels like one of those Ben Shapiro arguments where he just repeats all the statistics that shows Black folk are disadvantaged while completely ignoring the factors that lead to it even when they're right in his face.


I know we ain't gonna see eye-to-eye on this. In our past disagreements you've :cape: for standardized tests and tiered schooling systems even when they clearly disadvantage black children. Not to mention your support for police state, mass incarceration, landlord evictions, and rich people in general. We clearly have different allegiances and are fighting for different communities.

At least try and deal with the points I made instead of just repeating yourself. We already know who you'll support, but what's your case for it?
Actually my post is right in line with the thread topic, AND my initial reply to you.

The standardized test results from k-12 for NYC, my state, and YOUR state will probably be similar.

Let's stick to the topic of the thread, and what your recent comment to Dora was.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,801
Reputation
19,581
Daps
202,223
Reppin
the ether
Actually my post is right in line with the thread topic, AND my initial reply to you.

The standardized test results from k-12 for NYC, my state, and YOUR state will probably be similar.

Let's stick to the topic of the thread, and what your recent comment to Dora was.

We both agree that Asian students are fantastically advantaged by the current system. That's all your data showed.

You think they do better because they have a "better culture". I think they do better primarily because most Asian immigrants to this country are a selected elite, not a representative sample, and they both hold and work to monopolize resources that will advantage them.

I think the current system is broken. You wish the current system to remain and shout "just do better black people!"

You post did nothing to break down differences by national origin. And it completely failed to answer my question - if Asian educational culture is so much better, then why do the Indians/Thais/Indonesians/Filipinos who demonstrate above-average success here have such WOAT educational outcomes in their home countries?
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,801
Reputation
19,581
Daps
202,223
Reppin
the ether
@Get These Nets, American education statistics virtually always lump all black folk together so you can't tease out differences in the data. But UK studies often have better breakdowns. Take this one for example:

https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/rsu/site..._and_Attainment_in_Secondary_Schools_2014.pdf

They compared GCSE performance among folk of different language backgrounds. The results fly in the face of your bullshyt about "east asians succeed due to pro-education culture". There are the % of people from different language backgrounds who scored Five or more A*:

Japanese 85%
Sinhala 80%
Vietnamese 77%
Korean 76%
Hindi 76%
Tamil 75%
Serbian/Croatian 74%
Cantonese 74%
Igbo 74%
Gujarati 72%
Yoruba 71%
Swedish 70%
Chinese (I assume typically meaning Mandarin?) 68%
Tagalog/Filipino 66%
German 64%
Bengali 64%
Luganda 62%
Amharic 62%
Greek 60%
Dutch 59%
Akan 59%
English 57%
NATIONAL AVERAGE 57%
Chinese (Mandarin/Putonghua) 57%
French 57%
Spanish 54%
Italian 54%
Urdu 53%
Panjabi 51%
Somali 50%
Turkish 49%
Caribbean Creole French 46%
Polish 43%
Portuguese 39%
Romanian 37%
Pashto 37%
Lithuanian 36%
Hungarian 34%
Lingala 33%
Latvian 30%
Thai 30%



Note that Nigerian immigrants do just as well as Indians, Chinese, Koreans, and better than almost all European groups (not to mention the rest of the Asian groups). Note that Ugandans, Ethiopians, Ghanaians also perform above the national average. Whereas note that the "below average" groups are primarily groups that immigrated to the UK en masse rather than self-selecting for elite (Eastern and Southern Europeans, Panjabis, Pakistanis, Afghanis, Somalis, Caribbeans) and even include some groups that would be lumped into the "model minority" in America.

When African nations have an elite that they selectively import into another country, they perform above-average. When they primarily immigrate laborers or refugees, they perform below-average. The EXACT SAME would be true of most Asian nations if they were subject to the same circumstances. Your average destitute Indian/Chinese/Filipino/Indonesia/Thai/Laotian/Cambodian/Malaysian immigrant wouldn't be doing shyt in America if they were able to immigrate in the same manner as Latin American laborers or African refugees.
 

get these nets

Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
53,009
Reputation
14,319
Daps
199,861
Reppin
Above the fray.
We both agree that Asian students are fantastically advantaged by the current system. That's all your data showed.

You think they do better because they have a "better culture". I think they do better primarily because most Asian immigrants to this country are a selected elite, not a representative sample, and they both hold and work to monopolize resources that will advantage them.

I think the current system is broken. You wish the current system to remain and shout "just do better black people!"

You post did nothing to break down differences by national origin. And it completely failed to answer my question - if Asian educational culture is so much better, then why do the Indians/Thais/Indonesians/Filipinos who demonstrate above-average success here have such WOAT educational outcomes in their home countries?

The NYC example was deliberate."Selected elite" as you call the Asians would also exist in the other groups of immigrants in metro NYC. Yet the specialized test results, and standardized test results are what they are.

The ethnic composition of "Asians", "Latinos", and "Blacks" would differ between your state and mine. Cali and NJ.
Yet the standardized tests results between those "groups" would probably be similar.
Your thoughts?
 

ogc163

Superstar
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
9,027
Reputation
2,140
Daps
22,317
Reppin
Bronx, NYC
Looking over this thread there is the predictable tension regarding culture and the role it plays in outcomes.

And I think culture and cultural capital matters, but resources also matter, I admit I am not sure what matters more in terms of influencing outcomes.

But, an issue I have with both sides of the debate is that there is a tendency to overrate the potential impact of there specific issue potentially being addressed.

Overall, I don't expect the system to change because the folks who can influence change are generally ok with the status quo.

What will be interesting is seeing how Black Gen-X parents who parrot grit and grind narratives will deal with their children having less opportunities with affirmative action programs being undermined.
 

ogc163

Superstar
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
9,027
Reputation
2,140
Daps
22,317
Reppin
Bronx, NYC
The NYC example was deliberate."Selected elite" as you call the Asians would also exist in the other groups of immigrants in metro NYC. Yet the specialized test results, and standardized test results are what they are.

The ethnic composition of "Asians", "Latinos", and "Blacks" would differ between your state and mine. Cali and NJ.
Yet the standardized tests results between those "groups" would probably be similar.
Your thoughts?

I'm not sure the other groups have the same % of selected elites as Asian in NYC, how did you come to that conclusion?
 

Frangala

All Star
Joined
Nov 18, 2016
Messages
1,391
Reputation
478
Daps
4,758
Reppin
Le Grand Congo (Kin)
I'm not sure the other groups have the same % of selected elites as Asian in NYC, how did you come to that conclusion?

How are people actually measuring that in a such a narrow location or city. What is the metric of elitism? Educational attainment of parents in this case? If it is educational attainment, would a student be considered elite if his or her parents went to college but grandparents immigrated to the US without a college education or were the "laborer" class

Secondly, is that kid not a representative sample of the larger uneducated populace of his or her grandparents' country of origin or is the higher academic performance because of "selected elite status" derived from the education level of his or her parents instead of the lack of education his/her grandparents?
 
Last edited:

get these nets

Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
53,009
Reputation
14,319
Daps
199,861
Reppin
Above the fray.
I'm not sure the other groups have the same % of selected elites as Asian in NYC, how did you come to that conclusion?
"Selected elite" here is a deflection by Rha. The immigration process tends to attract ambitious, resourceful people from other countries. He suggested that somehow this was exclusive to those coming from certain countries in Asia, and implied that they had financial and social capital that immigrants from other places didn't.
Several streams of migration(from respective countries) have brought people here. People from different economic backgrounds of country X are here. Especially in NYC. The thing most would have in common would be that they are resourceful and ambitious.
 

ogc163

Superstar
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
9,027
Reputation
2,140
Daps
22,317
Reppin
Bronx, NYC
"Selected elite" here is a deflection by Rha. The immigration process tends to attract ambitious, resourceful people from other countries. He suggested that somehow this was exclusive to those coming from certain countries in Asia, and implied that they had financial and social capital that immigrants from other places didn't.
Several streams of migration(from respective countries) have brought people here. People from different economic backgrounds of country X are here. Especially in NYC. The thing most would have in common would be that they are resourceful and ambitious.

I don't have the data or links at hand, but different immigration patterns and the amount of education they received in their native countries impacting economic and academic outcomes is an accepted concept in economics.

I'll give a hypothetical example since I don't have the data, if China sends migrants to NYC and about 70% of those migrants had college education and/or access to credit/cash then they will likely have better overall outcomes than Guatemalan migrants where only 20% of them have college degrees and moat have limited access to credit/cash. And this type of disparity helps explain the academic disparities.

You seem to be emphasizing hard work, but immigrants who work hard and consistently dealt with complex, abstract, and adaptive systems in their native countries will outperform those who are unable to deal with those systems yet still work hard.
 

Geek Nasty

Brain Knowledgeably Whizzy
Supporter
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
29,721
Reputation
4,328
Daps
112,121
Reppin
South Kakalaka
Gifted and talented programs are segregation and clearly saying the normal classes aren't good.

Completely disagree. There's a real value in advanced classes because most classrooms are moving at too slow a pace for advanced students. This isn't about these classes being bad but that they're being exploited by parents with the assets to give their kids a head start or pay for tutoring/special teaching. It's like SAT training and tutoring you can take that WILL boost your score.

Another posters example of people gentrifying neighborhoods but sendind their kids to schools elsewhere is another example.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,801
Reputation
19,581
Daps
202,223
Reppin
the ether
Asian immigrants and 2nd/3rd generation are a FAR larger proportion of the Asian-American community than Black immigrants and 2nd/3rd generation are of the Black community. And the raw # of Chinese/Indian/Korean immigrants who come here with higher ed or high-achieving backgrounds is larger than the raw # of African/Caribbean immigrants who come here with such backgrounds. I don't know how you can even front to deny that.

And that doesn't change the fact that the same isn't true in their home countries, with the masses in many/most Asian nations remaining poorly educated.



The NYC example was deliberate."Selected elite" as you call the Asians would also exist in the other groups of immigrants in metro NYC.

Not even remotely in the same proportions. The # of African-Americans in NYC who came to the USA due to slavery is orders of magnitude larger than the # of Asian-Americans left over from the 19th century cheap labor era.

Then when you look at the 20th-century immigrant population (which is a far larger portion of the Asian population than for Black population), the Asian population in NYC is dominated by Chinese, Koreans, and Indians. All three of those groups have immigrated primarily via higher ed, intellectual occupations (mostly STEM), and business connections, and represent the elite of their nations. Whereas the largest Black immigrant groups in NYC are Jamaicans, Haitians, Trinis, and Guyanese. Those groups do have a proportion who come from higher ed / STEM backgrounds, but it's not nearly as high as in the Chinese/Korean/Indian trifecta, and they are diluted by the larger proportion that come from refugee status (in the case of Haitians), basic laborer work, and desperate economic need. Not to say that any group is a monolith - I have highly educated Haitian and Jamaican friends in NYC, and there are a few Asian refugees and laborers. But the proportions in the Black community are VERY different than the proportions in the Asian community.



The ethnic composition of "Asians", "Latinos", and "Blacks" would differ between your state and mine. Cali and NJ.
Yet the standardized tests results between those "groups" would probably be similar.
Your thoughts?
Across the USA, the dominant Asian-American populations virtually everywhere are Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Indian, Filipino, and Vietnamese. None of those are primarily refugees except for Vietnamese, and the Vietnamese refugees included a ton of upper-class elite who had sided with Americans as opposed to the masses who sided with the Communists and nationalists (that being said, Vietnamese demographics in USA are still broader than east Asian or Indian demographics and their achievement levels are much lower as a result).

Outside of those groups, no other Asian group comprises even 2% of the Asian total. Thus even though Cambodians, Laotians, and Hmong are low-achieving refugee groups (along with increasing #'s of Burmese) and Samoans/Tongans are lower-achieving due to broad-based immigration from their special US relationship, none of those groups is large enough to affect the total Asian #'s anywhere.

Similarly, African groups like Nigerians, South Africans, Ghanaians, Tanzanians are on average very high achieving in the USA, but they simply aren't as large a proportion of the overall Black population.
 
Top