Wednesday, May 23, 2012



The rating system, ParkScore, is based on more than a year's worth of data from cities and parks departments around the country. The scores are a composite of five factors: median park size, acreage as a percent of city area, percent of residents living within a 10-minute walk of a park, park system spending per resident, and the number of playgrounds per 10,000 residents.
"Even if you have a big city or a small city, a dense city or a more spread out city, an older city or a younger city, we feel that those factors all point to a pretty fair way of judging cities against each other," says Peter Harnik, director of the Trust for Public Land's Center for City Park Excellence. He says advanced GIS data enabled a more detailed analysis of spatial information, including pedestrian barriers like train tracks or paths uncrossable without a bridge.
In addition to the rankings, the Trust for Public Land has created a website where the complete data from all the rankings can be seen. Users can also see block-level maps showing the most park-accessible areas in these cities.
No one city performed ideally across all these metrics. Top ranking San Francisco, for example, has a median park size of just 2 acres, while 8th-ranked San Diego has a median size of 6.7 acres. And while Virginia Beach has the highest number of parks per 10,000 residents in this list – 5 – the city ranks 7th.
Harnik notes that a wide variety of factors determine how well a city's parks serve its people. The number of playgrounds may be the most important.
"We feel a playground is really a basic bottom-line measure of what a city park system is doing for its residents. Obviously playgrounds are great for children, but they go way beyond children. They're community gathering areas, they are so important to the social network of a neighborhood and a city," Harnik says. "It's somewhat of a predictor of the other kinds of facilities that a city parks department provides its citizens."

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

our balkanized, inefficient and anachronistic education system


The best thing about the school property tax cap is that it undermines the integrity of our balkanized, inefficient and anachronistic education system. A system that separates kids based on illogical and superficial political divisions established in an era when horses pulled farmer’s carts home after market, and white men exercised a political and economic monopoly. An educational system that supports an agricultural society not a nano-technological one, because it limits the days devoted to book learning to 180, or 49% of the year. All of these issues, and more, compound to create a very dysfunctional K-12 educational system across this country, and in fact, the problems are so dire that that the Council on Foreign Relations recently concluded that they “constitute a very grave national security threat facing this country[1]

This country needs to modernize our education system by eliminating antiquated structures and ensure that all students, regardless of the wealth of the family that they were born into, have outstanding teachers, campuses and resources. However, across New York State “school districts have overwhelmingly complied with the spirit of the tax cap, unfortunately to the detriment of their educational mission and financial stability,” said NYSASBO Executive Director Michael
J. Borges.[2]

The Schenectady School Board is no exception, and while the Superintendent and the Board stated that the budget overwhelmingly approved by the voters “preserves the full range of instructional programs and services so critical to the success of our students”[3], they are being either disingenuous or dangerously naive about education.

First, the 2012-13 Schenectady School Budget will undercut pre-k education by reducing funds for supplies and eliminating a teacher. Research shows that intensive instruction for pre-k kids generates life long rewards for the student and society, but neglecting early education decreases the nation’s economic productivity and limits possibilities for children. The need is vast for rigorous early education. For example, one study that found that the vocabularies of kids from low-income families were 50% smaller than kids from upper and middle-income families.[4]  What the district saves in this budget cycle on short-changing 4 year-olds will cost the school district and society many times that amount in the future.

Second, the Board will destroy, for at least one year, one of the true bright spots in the district when it reorganizes the Magnet schools. K-8 schools are advantageous for many reasons: continuity for students, collaboration amongst teachers, stable school culture, and a sense of community for all. 

By ripping away all of the kindergartens and putting them in one place, away from other kids in the same developmental stage, the people will save a few dollars. However, this is financially myopic and contrary to best educational practice. Part of education is foreword looking, a sense of transition, and the formation of possibilities. Without older students modeling academic growth – and possibly tutoring them- the kindergartners will loose valuable visions of development.  Furthermore, if the kindergarteners need advanced enrichment, where will they go?

The K-8 model will have the K removed and as a result, students arriving as first graders will not have the benefit of having teachers know them; they will not know the physical space, they will not know the culture and possibilities possible at the school; the unnecessary transition to a new environment will impede the education of many kids. First grade education, which is the foundation for future growth, will suffer as a result.

The ratified 2012-13 budget will transfer 155 students into the magnet schools, and this will effectively curtail the 1-8 into a 1-6.  The introduction of masses of new students into an established school will be destabilizing. Teachers will not know the students, and students will not know the school and all of its characteristics. These new students will be disoriented themselves and they will undermine the educational balance of the established school community. The 7th and 8th grades, now weighted beyond their natural structural size, will effectively be a mini-middle school.

This one-year budget will undermine so much of the stability generating and community building enabled by public schools. The much-lauded K-8 magnet schools will be dead, pre-schoolers will be stifled, and kindergartners and some middle schoolers will not have a stable learning community. We will be worse off as a result.

The vast majority of teacher slashing and education depleting school budgets across NYS passed on May 15th, and this summons the specter of an ‘educational insolvency’ that the State Education Commissioner John King has raised[5]. Our country deserves better than austerity education for our children. However, by undermining the current system perhaps people will reflect upon how artificially fractured, unjust, antiquated and weak our education system is, and strive to create a modern and dynamic structure that will enrich all children and make our country safe and vibrant.