+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Changes in G&T admissions for siblings?

    I heard through the grapevine there are discussions on changing the DOE G&T priority where before you just needed score at 97 and above for citywide (lower for district) and would get priority. Now it may be sibling 99s, then all 99s, sibling 98s then all 98s and so on. Has anyone heard anything of this nature?

    Also hearing of potential admissions changes in citywide G&T schools to promote more diversity that may impact admissions for this coming year....

  2. #2
    Horrible idea to change it in such a way. Having to take your kids to two different schools is a chore and there would be a lot of pushback from the current g&t parents (and the only difference it would make is to very marginally increase likelihood of non-siblings to get in). I do not see how politically feasible this change is. Where did you hear this?

  3. #3
    I heard it directly from someone who works in the admissions office from a G&T school. She said that isn't handled by the school level but there have been conversations around it. She also mentioned that the school submitted a plan to be enacted for this coming admissions season to increase diversity. I don't have any details on it but expect to hear about it this fall. Supposedly won't impact sibling priority but you never know...

  4. #4

    Good idea, but unlikely to happen

    Mruser -- you only think it's a bad idea because it will affect you personally if you already have your older child in the G&T school and have a second child. For those parents who have only one child, we think this would be a fabulous change because how on earth is it fair that someone's second child can score a 97 yet get preference over my kid's 99? There's an extremely limited number of G&T spots (Anderson has only 50, NEST has only 100) and each year 20-30% of those are given to siblings even if that shuts out other higher scoring kids. The point of G&T is to educate the most deserving students, not to increase family convenience.

    But that said, I sadly do agree with you this is unlikely to happen. In fact, the city did make that exact change back in 2012 ( https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/n...dmissions.html ) but then reversed course a year later. Sadly, I don't expect them to change it again.

    micbee -- I wonder where you heard this rumor? Most recent action from the NYC DOE seems to be going in the exact opposite direction of making sibling priority more important ( https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/ny/2...and-diversity/ ). Besides, the school chancellor is already starting several other controversial battles over the G&T program -- it seems unlikely to me that he'd want the additional fight of arguing this policy change too.
    Last edited by heapchk; 08-20-2019 at 07:42 AM.

  5. #5
    I dropped off and picked up multiple kids from multiple schools for years under a number of uneasy conditions, weather, distance, travel and sickness. It's possible in many situations, but, well, as just mentioned, definitely uneasy and inconvenient. Having said this, I also realize that in some situations, it's not possible, at least not single handedly. So everybody's situation is different. And this is often true sometimes for just one kid.

    The "family convenience allowance" is oddish and both a pro and a con, always has been, including in non-G&T situations.

    I think the reason for the "family convenience allowance" in G&T is shall I say the margin of error in the test and the testing environment but the problem with that is that if a sibling 97 is good, so is a non-siblings 97. So again oddish but I can see both sides of the situation at least in terms of desires. But you're right G&T = family convenience is not supposed to be the point.
    Passionate tutor of Elementary School subjects specializing in NY state tests, and the specialized high/middle school tests (SHSAT, Hunter, TACHS/CHSEE, BCA, MS 54, Anderson...)

  6. #6
    Basically, abolishing sibling preference will majorly piss off all current parents of kids whose sibling has not yet tested, and these people will complain a lot. On the other hand, there is no group that will argue the other side because, ex ante, parents of non-siblings who have yet not tested do not know their kids score or how kids will do in lottery. So, the policy change would only result in a lot of people complaining very loudly; ergo, it will not happen.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts