If one has common sense will know which HS is the best
Stuy = based on 1 test, cannot determine their smartest. Over 3000 students,
It's impossible that all are smart. (90% with tutoring)
Hunter = very selective. 6 - 12 grades, good grades with test exam.
Townsend Harris = very selective. required excellent attendance. 95 avg above and
3 or above city test
Stuy (#33) has better ranking than hunter and TH (#35)
Ranking = meaningless. NEWCOMERS (#6) ????
Facts
Stuy - bigger school. newer building. more classes, more students
Hunter - small school. old building. small class. less students
TH similar to Hunter but in much better environment

Therefore, I would have to say, Hunter or TH over Stuy anything being best HS in NYC
because of the MERIT and Very Selective

all i gotta say is TECH IS THE BEST! HOLLA FRONT!

so if you could afford either, would you send your kindergartener to hunter or to St. Ann's?

Does anyone have a specific reference or copy of the Hecht-Calandra bill? I need it to try to save another school.

My nephew is starting as a freshman at Stuy this fall. What Spanish textbook should he get for second year Spanish if he wants to get a head start this summer on his own?

Any current stuy students out there who can help with this info?

Thanks,

mao365@yahoo.com

Several issues to address:

1) Stuy funding: it gets less funding than many other schools because of its practically nonexistent group of special education, struggling students, etc. However, Stuy and other good schools do get a smaller return than they bring into the system because the state allocates the money based on school attendance; the city gives it based on capacity. So a school with 60% attendance is in a better position than a school with 98% attendance. A lot of funding is through the Parents Associasion and Alumni Association and other private grants. It is similar for Bronx Science and Brooklyn Tech, except that their principal is at odds with alumni.

2) I don't know about overcrowding, but I think Stuy is justified in diminishing its class size. Those who got accepted into no high school at all probably would not have succeeded in getting a place in Stuyvesant, anyway.

3) Elitism: this is something that the NYC education system has been fighting for decades, and has largely succeeded in the fight, except for the specialized high schools, whose standing was secured by the Hecht-CAlandra bill. however, catering to the lowest common denominator doesn't seem to be doing our education system much good, is it?

Wow, these threads get really interesting and I'm glad to see the different points of views of people. As someone who understands a lot of these issues firsthand a lot people should understand a few things. Nick is right on target about the school funding issues. Stuyvesant is a public high school (just one where you have to take a test to get into).

There is also a growing and distinct difference between the current Stuyvesant located in Battery Park City (not the more famously known Tribeca as everyone wants to claim) and the older classes over the school's 100 year history. The population of the school (as diverse a population as can be based on exams) has changed abruptly from my Class of 1996 was 710 strong while these classes currently boast 760+.

Principal Teitel was quick to judge on how 'overcrowding' has affected Stuy. This is more of political turf war between Stuyvesant and the newly formed Dept of Education. Why then does the Dept. of Ed continue its push for smaller is better schools in other neighborhoods.

What in the end has to be maintained is the best possible educations for one of the best schools in NYC, if not the best, people that didn't go to Stuyvesant may only see the so called 'top dawg snobs'. Yeah they're out there, but there are really exceptional ppl out there including the ppl of gothamist who continue to do amazing things!

I really wish we could focus on improving schools that need better press rather than Stuyvesant. Take a look at Brooklyn Tech, a far cry from the school it was in the 70s and 80s, it's merely one of the biggest schools in NYC that's now overshadowed by programs at Midwood, Townsend Harris (one of my favorites, more so than Hunter...) & the 3 newest specialized high schools (York, CCNY, Lehman).

The real issue is the end goal and that's education for all!

Nick - I went link-searching as well, with no luck. When I was at Stuy (I graduated in 1979), the City was trying to work around Gramm-Rudman (Hollings? maybe) provisions to try to cut Stuy/Bronx Science/Brooklyn Tech funding, exactly as had been projected. This was in the "Ford to City: Drop Dead" budgetary days, and it's hard to imagine how bad things were then. City Hall was very creative in cutting programs, legally or not.

One of the tricks at Stuy, which was pretty well protected otherwise, was to assign teachers to minor departments and then eliminate the entire department budget. We lost an English teacher, Mr. Dolan, to this sort of reassignment; one day he was no longer in the English Department, but had been excessed to the Speech Department. Who knew we had a Speech Department? Sadly enough, we didn't have a Speech Department. Zip! This was only done once or twice, presumably because the teachers' union (not quite what it was under Al Shanker) was still pretty strong.

The protective provision was an amendment to the G-R bill, and it prohibited cuts in funding below established levels - levels at the incept of the bill, I think - for a variety of institutions, among which the NYC specialized schools were included. I no longer remember if it was by name or by class; at the time the specialized schools were fewer - the three academic schools, Art & Design, Music & Art, and I think one Printing school was considered specialized as well. These 25 years later the details are a little vague.

CO:

Wait... if Stuyvesant is "no better than any other school when you come down to it" then why the hell is this even a big deal? I mean this is a big New York Times story... Who cares if Stuy's enrollment is cut... just go somewhere else, right?

Take that all y'all who are making excuses for cutting class size while students are crowded in other schools. Stuyvesant is no better than any other school when you come down to it and now 100 more students who can and want to learn will now be able to learn.

Ha! Check this out all you "Stuyvesant is better than you all" whiners!

--

Stuyvesant High School To Restore Cuts To Enrollment

MAY 20TH, 2004

The more than 100 seats cut from the incoming freshmen class as the prestigious Stuyvesant High School will reportedly be restored the following year.

Earlier this week, administrators at the school revealed they reduced the size of next year’s enrollment to alleviate crowding.

But according to the New York Times, the Education Department says the school should not have cut enrollment, because there is a shortage of seats at high schools citywide.

The paper says Stuyvesant will remedy the situation by admitting additional students to its freshmen and sophomore classes for the school year that begins in the fall of 2005.

--

Linus:

Just curious, I can't find ANY information regarding Gramm-Rudman (I assume you mean Gramm-Rudman-Hollings) that shows it provides extra funding for Stuyvesant. Can you show me where you've seen that Gramm-Rudman helps support Stuyvesant (or the other two schools?) [Regardless the act was found unconstitional in 1987]

Stuyvesant does not recieve more funding from the state and city per student.

"Stuy's student population does not generate the reimbursable state and federal dollars mandated for students with special learning skills, skills remediation and english language development skills." - taken from friends for stuyvesant literature

This hurts Stuy significantly (coupled with the added costs of the stuy programs...)

So, you keep mentioning Gramm-Rudman, but I have yet to find any way it's linked to Stuy. Got a link?

Whoops! You said *NOT* elitist. Never mind. Teach me to post before my first coffee...

Whoops! You said *NOT* elitist. Never mind. Teach me to post before my fist coffee...

Completely untrue, Nick; an entrance exam is not elitist. It is a test. If you pass the test then you deserve to get in, and if you don't then you do not. That is not "elitism," it's good sense. In other exciting news, if you don't pass the bar exam you're not a lawyer, if you don't qualify on your internship you're not a doctor, if you don't pass your road test you won't legally be able to drive. None of these is elitist, nor is the Stuy exam.

As for your earlier comment where you announced that I was wrong, I'm not going to respond to it much, since you don't appear to actually address the contents of my post. Gramm-Rudman specifically protected the three specialized schools from budget cuts in its time, and there was talk for some time of extending those protections beyond the Act's expiry for special projects, Stuyvesant included, so that future budget-cutters would be prohibited by law from eliminating something of Stuy's obvious value. Wrong? I think not.

Airfare for the Robotics Team would not come under any state or city budget that I can imagine. That's why athletic teams all over America have benefits and the like, to pay for costs that have nothing to do with school. It's an extra-curricular activity.

As far as other schools getting more money because of Special Ed programs, that's just silly. That money does not go to the schools as a whole or to the student body. It goes to Special Ed programs. That's like saying Seattle is rich because it's near Microsoft. There's roll-off money that keeps restaurants and bars (somewhat) oiled, sure. But the presence of funding doesn't touch the masses.

Alrighty Then, let me clarify this.

I obviously didn’t mean EVERYONE in the schools mentioned above were pompous and elitist. I have friends who went to Stuy and Bronx Science who went in and came out pretty good and well mannered. And yes its very true, Francis Lewis, Cardozo, Jamaica High School, they all have their own population of conceited people. But the people I have known, the times I've gone through each school, and the attitudes I have encountered, I think it’s safe to say these top schools have the Lion's Share.

Especially Hunter High School students. I know too many of them to be asshats.

Kojak: 3200 kids in the school every year (all four grades) and they're all arrogant pompous stuck up jerks? Hell, taking Science+Hunter+Stuy and you have something like 5500-6000 kids in these schools?

So let's see... you say they're all snobs. 6000 snobs but you're obviously not bitter or jealous... right. How about the fact that you might be bitter and jealous, but these 6000 kids are not all snobs?

And besides, there are some snobby kids in ALL schools. I hear tons of Hunter kids who are snobby, I hear tons of Science kids who are. But there are tons of snobby kids at all schools. Hell, they're snobby people where I work... they're snobby people at my college.. everything can breed some form of snobbery.

Once again, that doesn't change the fact that the admissions policy isn't elitist.

I've seen a lot of bigheads in my day (And I'm only 21), but I have never witnessed snobbery like that which I have seen from the students of Hunter High School, Stuyvesant, and Bronx Science. I put Hunter on top of that list because they have championed the art of thinking they are better then anyone else.

Some may say that I'm bitter from not being accepted into these schools to begin with, but I am neither bitter nor jealous. I speak from experience.

I heard that Capt Obvious.

TESTIFY!!

The elitist attitude comes from the fact that I grew up in this city and new people who went to the 15th Street Stuy and the Tribeca Stuy and in ALL cases those people have some overly ripe swelled heads when compared to people I know who have gone to Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Science and Hunter.

While those other schools academically are on par with Stuyvesant, nobody has an attitude or chip on their shoulder about the education nor do they rub their self-perceived "Stuy Cred" in other people's faces.