NYC's Gay High School

Thomas wrote:

Jim wrote:
Can you imagine the outcry if there was a "Whites Only" high school supported by public funds? So what's the difference here?

I see no difference at all -- but then again, I have no problem with segregation as long as it is a result of voluntary self-selection, as opposed to Jim Crow style legislation. So if the gay teenagers of New York want their own high school, why not?

Excellent point. The only "why not" I can think of is cost. Public school systems are failing miserably with limited resources. If some children would perform better in special-interest schools, would the benefit in terms of outcome outweigh any additional costs incurred to establish and run such schools?

0 Replies

Scrat wrote:

but what's next; a separate school for wimps, nerds and geeks?

As for nerds and geeks, we've been having those in Germany for over half a century. They're called "Technisch-naturwissenschaftliches Gymnasium" -- rough translation: Technical-scientific high school. They don't upset the educational system.

Scrat wrote:

Does that justify the expense of setting up a separate school for them?

Quite possibly yes, because the economies of scale in schooling are modest, so the expense of setting up a seperate school is offset by cost reductions in the schools they leave.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

But, again, in terms of precedent etc., there ARE black charter schools, there have been for a while, and they don't seem to have caused any huge upheaval in how things work.

True again, there are all sorts of precedents. An exsisting precedent doesn't mean the idea isn't silly though! Smile

The entire thrust of groups supporting GLBT's has been "we are normal" and "we are a part of everyday society". Creating a school that has it's purpose in educating kids that have problems in "everyday society" beacuse of their sexual orientation seems to run counter to the larger message.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

As for nerds and geeks, we've been having those in Germany for over half a century. They're called "Technisch-naturwissenschaftliches Gymnasium" -- rough translation: Technical-scientific high school. They don't upset the educational system.

Add a couple of dozen years to that. (We even had a "pudding high school", ehem, a girl's high school, focussed on oecotrophologic subjects.)

0 Replies

Thomas - Unless those special schools were setup for the reasons we are discussing--to protect the kids from harassment--I don't think we are talking about the same thing. Also, you must realize that there are such schools in larger metropolitan areas here, but that due to the size of the US, not every school system can offer separate facilities for those gifted in science and math.

0 Replies

Thomas

Quote:

Quite possibly yes, because the economies of scale in schooling are modest, so the expense of setting up a separate school is offset by cost reductions in the schools they leave.

IMO the entire idea belongs in the trash bin. However I would just like to dwell on the above statement. I don't know about the costs in Germany but the staffing, upkeep, and overheads of a school building in NY are nothing to be sneezed at. They are substantial very substantial.

0 Replies

fishin' wrote:

True again, there are all sorts of precedents. An exsisting precedent doesn't mean the idea isn't silly though!

The thing with the precedent is not that it exists or that it's silly, but that it wasn't the thin edge of the wedge. Arguments here seem to be saying something like, "Well one school is fine, but the problem is what this will start." I'm saying that there have been similar precedents (silly or not) that haven't started any kind of sweeping change.

fishin' wrote:

The entire thrust of groups supporting GLBT's has been "we are normal" and "we are a part of everyday society". Creating a school that has it's purpose in educating kids that have problems in "everyday society" beacuse of their sexual orientation seems to run counter to the larger message.

"The entire thrust", eh? I thought it was more like, "we are normal", "we have the right to be part of everyday society", and "discrimination based on sexual orientation exists, is wrong, and we will do what we can to counteract it, including creation of safe spaces."

Also, I think there are positive aspects -- pride, community, history -- but I gotta go!

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

I don't know about the costs in Germany but the staffing, upkeep, and overheads of a school building in NY are nothing to be sneezed at. They are substantial very substantial.

They are very substantial, but they are also proportionate to the number of pupils. When running a school, the lion's share of your cost is rent and maintenance for the classrooms, salaries for the teachers, and teaching materials for the pupils. While these costs do contain overhead, they are roughly proportional to the number of students. So the effect of splitting a big school into two smaller ones doesn't affect total cost much. Sozobe and Walter, you're the experts, please correct me if I'm talking nonsense!

-- Thomas

0 Replies

Well, Thomas, the number of students this school would take in would not be significant enough to ease the burden of any of the (many) schools that would likely be contributing students, so the effect would be equivalent to that of opening a new, small school (offset by any facilities or infrastructure that are already in place).

0 Replies

patiodog wrote:

Well, Thomas, the number of students this school would take in would not be significant enough to ease the burden of any of the (many) schools that would likely be contributing students, so the effect would be equivalent to that of opening a new, small school (offset by any facilities or infrastructure that are already in place).

If expenses are proportional to the number of pupils, the cost of the new school equals total cost reduction in the old schools, significant or not. I agree that if you have a lot of old schools, you get statistical noise -- sometimes a room can be rented out, sometimes not. Sometimes an extra teacher can be laid off (or not hired), sometimes not. But on average, cost reductions in the old schools will still equal cost increases in the new school.

0 Replies

Mmmmmmmmmmm, I can't imagine an individual class, for instance, would lose more than one or two students. The only savings you get reducing a class from 38 to 36 pupils (for instance -- and it's getting to the point where this is not an abnormally large class in this country) is the cost of two books, and perhaps two desks. The demand in terms of number of rooms and instructers doesn't really change.

On the other hand, the cost of administering a school of, say 150 students in a city that has literally hundreds of public schools is relatively insignicant in itself. (On a side note, most of the students, because they are drawn from all over the city to a single location will place a higher demand on transportation services, but this is also insignificant on an island of 10 million people -- or whatever the number is.)

0 Replies

Instead, there should be a separate school for bullies and homophobics.

0 Replies

patiodog wrote:

The demand in terms of number of rooms and instructers doesn't really change.

I hope I'm not ruining this thread with technicalities, but this is what I meant by "statistical noise". In practice, schools have some maximum class size. The exact size doesn't matter for my argument -- let's just say it's 30 students. Now a student leaves the school. 29 out of 30 times, nothing happens, just as you say. One out of 30 times though, the total number of students in her year is now a multiple of 30; the school can reduce the number of classes by one, fire a teacher of 30 students and rent out a room for 30 students. On average, you still save the cost of educating one student, though the statistical noise makes this a bit difficult to see.

0 Replies

I understand what you're saying; I just don't think the impact of this one school will ever be large enough to get past this noise. For a school to be able to eliminate one class in your model, 30 students would have to move from it to the Milk school, and that's not likely to happen, ever, so long as the Milk school takes in sucha a small number of students. Thus, the schools the students leave will never be able to reduce their number of classes. (And this is assuming that all 30 students would have been in comparable classes, which is unlikely; some would have been in prep courses, some in remedial.)

Not a point that really concerns me, but at least it's more concrete than the actual question at hand.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

The thing with the precedent is not that it exists or that it's silly, but that it wasn't the thin edge of the wedge. Arguments here seem to be saying something like, "Well one school is fine, but the problem is what this will start." I'm saying that there have been similar precedents (silly or not) that haven't started any kind of sweeping change.

But I am not aware of a single separate facility for black students having been setup on the premise that the students needed a safe haven in which to learn. One of which I am aware was setup for black boys only. The concept was that these children needed strong black male models that were lacking in most of their lives and the school was staffed to provide for this need. This had nothing to do with creating a safe place for them to go, nor has anyone argued that gay students have special educational needs. I see yours as an apples and oranges comparison. (Nicely made, of course, but apples and oranges just the same. Very Happy

)

0 Replies

dupre wrote:

Instead, there should be a separate school for bullies and homophobics.

Now that idea might actually have some merit. It isn't gay students who need special instruction, it's students who are violent and antisocial.

0 Replies

Wouldn't the gay students bash the occasional bisexual?
Wouldn't the macho type gay students bash the fem types?
Wouldn't the homophobics from the nearest school bash the whole of Harvey Milk H.S?

0 Replies

patiodog wrote:

For a school to be able to eliminate one class in your model, 30 students would have to move from it to the Milk school

Nope. For every single student who leaves, there is a probability of 1/30 that this will eliminate one class and free resources for educating 30 students. The cost saved on average is 30/30 times the cost of educating one student.

0 Replies

I went to a predominantly black school in the late 50's and early 60's which was my neighborhood school, and then was transferred to the "smart kids" school out of my district which was predominantly white.

At my neighborhood school I was called a little white bitch and beat up for my lunch money every day until one day I cut a kids throat and told him if he told I'd kill his sister. I'm not making this up or exaggerating. I then became the crazy white boy and most people left me alone. There were a couple of equally grisly incidents I won't bore you with.

I then transferred to the predominately white "gifted" school which was supposed to "save" me and get me back on track. There I was called a nigger and a nigger lover (wigger wasn't invented yet) and was told to go back to my neighborhood with the other niggers.

I learned that everyone is a bully at heart and if you're the different one, you're fvcked in any situation. People basically suck and enjoy being what they are, and that's that. They can't help it.

Might as well have gay schools and give these kids, for one brief moment in their life anyway, a respite from their fellow humans and I use the term loosely.

Good thing I'm not cynical. :wink: Razz

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

patiodog wrote:
For a school to be able to eliminate one class in your model, 30 students would have to move from it to the Milk school

Nope. For every single student who leaves, there is a probability of 1/30 that this will eliminate one class and free resources for educating 30 students. The cost saved on average is 30/30 times the cost of educating one student.

In theory. In the reality of impacted American public schools, though, where nearly every class is considerably larger than the target amount, the best result you're going to see is a slight easing on the crowding. At least, that's the way I see it. When the target is 28, reducing the size of the class from 38 to 37 (these are realistic numbers) is never going to result in the elimination of a class. This is what I went through growing up, anyway, where there were sometimes not even enough desks for the students.

Anyway, not really important.

(added) The question is not one of how much reduction in student numbers will result in the elimination of classrooms, but how many "extra" students will be allowed before new ones are added. When I was in high school (in CA, granted, not NY) there were two new high schools added in my district to help ease class sizes at the main high school. This did not result in the elimination of a single teaching position or classroom at the main high school, not a one -- nor did any of the teachers move from the main high school to either of the other ones. All new positions were created at these. With the new construction, the per capita cost of education in the district increased significantly (which was a good thing, as this was much needed, but the re-distribution of students most definitely resulted in increased expenditures).

0 Replies

NYC's Gay High School

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know