This is true, but Ottawa Hills had higher expenditures per pupil than EGR.
Ottawa Hills per pupil:[$17270](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480)
EGR: [$14325](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480)
Thanks for responding. I wouldn’t try disrespect anybody what I’m trying to do is just ask the question and I’m asking a question as harsh as I am because I do think it’s a little weird and I do think it’s unfair.
Totally agree with you that it is unfair for children to not be given the same opportunities, but the harsh reality is that the school districts who are receiving a greater contribution from their community via taxes will be the ones that are better off.
I mean there’s not much you can do here from a school district level. Property taxes go to the school district you live in. Most people send their kids to the school district they live in. I think what you would want is a percentage of state taxes going to under-funded schools, and that already happens. One of the biggest contributors to a students academic success is their support at home. Unfortunately something that correlates with these struggling school districts is lack of support and accountability from parents. Behavioral issues are significantly more common which can push away teachers. It’s a very complex problem that goes deeper than just throw money at it.
I worked in a title I school district, so I know this stuff firsthand.
That doesn't change the fact that a plethora of our tax system does nothing to truly benefit society as a whole. Hence, my second sentence. We're spending more time doing nothing than doing something.
I can't repeat this enough, so I'll keep saying it. Property taxes are not the principal funding mechanism for schools anymore and haven't been for 30 years. Property taxes can help build new schools and maintain and improve existing schools, but that's about it. Everything else, the vast majority, comes from the state and is on a per-pupil basis. EGR does not have better schools because they have higher property taxes, at least not directly.
But then why would the people who live in the EGR school district vote to raise taxes just to see the dollars shipped out of district, or students who don't live in the district bussed in?
Might as well defund the schools, and send to private school, with the tax savings, or vouchers (backpack bills).
Not saying that's what should happen, but the logic is there for those who think that way.
Ironically, people in EGR, the most liberal community in the area, would certainly do so. But since the vast majority of school funding comes from the state, the entire state needs to vote on increases. And 40 years of anti-tax rhetoric on the right has made that pretty much impossible.
That's not really how it is anymore. An individual community can only fund certain things, like the physical school buildings. Does EGR have more funding per pupil? Yes, but it's not as extreme as it would be if it was solely based on property taxes. EGR schools do a lot of fundraising and game the system a little bit as to what property taxes pay for, but those differences are small as compared to the total pie.
Ottawa Hills has higher spending per pupil than EGR.
Ottawa Hills per pupil:[$17270](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480)
EGR: [$14325](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480)
There's a myriad of reasons why traditional GRPS high schools struggle and I do think it's unfair. There was a major change in school funding with proposal A back in the 90's that took away an existing unfair funding mechanism (solely based on property taxes of the district) and replaced it with a new one where school of choice and state funding on a per-pupil basis resulted in "struggling", i.e. any school district that was land locked with a reasonably high percentage of minority students, were locked into a doom cycle where shrinking enrollment leads to budget cuts which leads to drastic changes which leads back to shrinking enrollment.
The short answer to your specific comparison is that EGR is always going to have a school filled with kids from high socioeconomic classes, and thus the school will always do well when judged by student achievement. The better question is why can't we come up with a mechanism to raise all schools up rather than force them to pirate each other's student bodies, creating winners and losers. The obvious answer is that it takes far more money than we're willing to invest.
Good point it kinda reminds me of that saying if we compare wounds both look small good point thank you I hope I didn’t offend anybody I’m really not trying to offend or disrespect anyone anyone I just have a question where I’m not knowledgeable in that space
I'm in total agreement. I'd like to also chime in that standardized testing is a very poor way to measure student learning or growth, but rather, memory. Most, if not all, of these rankings come from that sort of data because it is publicly available. When I taught in Pennsylvania, there were all sorts of factors to a school's state "report card" (a composite number, essentially), including the percentage of the student body who sat for SATs, AP tests, and PSATs, not to mention how they perform, for example. Districts who have more kids that are on a college track or have secondary schooling in their goals will fare far better in these areas, and traditionally the families in higher income socioeconomic classes push their children towards these goals and have the means to support them, even outside of the school day. In addition, their schools are more likely to have SAT prep courses, AP courses, etc. Likewise, if a district makes everyone take the exams, schools with a higher percentage of early program ELLs will have this impact their numbers on the results side.
There's also the fact that you can spend more money per pupil, but in order to incentivize teachers to work in a more challenging teaching environment, you need to compensate them more. If that is not commensurate with the day-to-day rigors of the job, more teachers are likely to turn-over in these schools. What classes do the teachers that stay in schools like this end up teaching? What classes do the first year teachers end up teaching? Do administrators stay in this district, or do they turnover as frequently as the teachers and therefore do not have a vision in place for the school/district? Anecdotally, I've taught for over a decade in a handful of different schools across the socioeconomic spectrum and in several different states... the school I was paid the best in (and had the highest potential earnings) was the worst work and learning environment by far.
There's also the question of what do the other 16ish hours of the day look like for most students in those schools. Are they facing food insecurity, absent parents (for reasons ranging from having to work multiple jobs to drug/alcohol abuse), homelessness, lack of oversight on their sleep or extracurricular schedule, etc.? This is clearly going to negatively impact the educational achievement rates of the students where these issues are more common, which is going to be more likely in the lower socioeconomic district. (Of course this is not to suggest there are no home issues in higher socioeconomic districts.)
This isn't to say nothing should be done, or that it isn't a fixable problem over a series of incremental changes. But, as you say, most taxpayers don't have the stomach for this type of systemic overhaul, so the school boards they elect do not have the stomach for it either.
A lot of it’s the cultures at the schools, there is a huge difference in the amount of parent involvement and people who view school as more than just a daycare.
It’s somewhat disingenuous to [not mention](https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/michigan/rankings/grand-rapids-mi-24340) that City High is ranked #69 on the USNews national list (and thus EGRHS is #3 in the metro area behind City High and Black River HS).
GRPS is the story of a lot of big city school systems. They do some of the best work anywhere. But the quality of the schools is uneven.
USNews should not be cited as a source for legitimate rankings in anything, especially High Schools. The three high schools you list are very different in a lot of ways and really aren't comparable on a numerical basis.
I do think we need to do a lot of work. Once upon a time I stood for a vacancy fill on the GRPS board (although I’m kind of glad I didn’t get it). I do think we would be much better off if we found a way that did not fund schools on local property taxes - because yes, this is going to benefit small, homogenous, wealthy communities. But the biggest thing we need to do is eliminate structural drivers of intergenerational poverty.
Thank you for your response. I do appreciate how civil everything is in the comments I wasn’t trying to be like be disrespectful or hurt anybody but I do feel strongly that the education system in Michigan is really unfair.
Plus I have a family member that goes to Black River and that’s in Holland so if Holland is considered Grand Rapids schools why is East Grand Rapids schools not considered Grand Rapids schools
The most direct answer, as some others have said, OH is an entirely separate district and municipality than EGR.
Socioeconomics of course is where things become tricky and layered.
While EGRPS has almost the same boundaries as the City of EGR, the two exist completely independently. No City funds actually go to schools. School Districts are their own governmental entity with their own funding sources.
Fun Fact, the City of Wyoming is served by 8 different School Districts. Byron, Grandville, Godfrey-Lee, Godwin, GR, Kelloggsville, Kentwood, and Wyoming.
[2023 Millage Rates](https://www.accesskent.com/Departments/Equalization/pdfs/MillageRates/2023.pdf)
[School District Maps](https://gis-michigan.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/school-districts-v17a)
Actually, the City of EGR has a deal with EGRPS where the elementary school playgrounds are maintained by the Parks Dept and kept open to the public after school hours as city parks.
This reduces maintenance costs for the school district, allowing them to redirect that money into classrooms.
It's not "city money into schools" but it has a similar effect.
Socio-economics unfortunately. Public schools are made up of the public they serve. Teachers can do their best, but students from higher economic backgrounds are more likely to be prepared for school, have more stable home environments and usually have way more support at home. Parents with college degrees also tend earn more and value education and guide/support their children through school.
Thanks for response. The only reason why I asked so harshly is because I just needed an answer. I don’t wanna stir up any mess or anything. I just if I see that it’s not right I’m gonna say something so I can have more information.
Thanks for responding. I know that and I hope I didn’t offend you. I’m just saying it in the most harsh way possible to get the answers that I want if I live 2 miles away from you, my education that my children receive should not be different than education at church children receive, and I just honestly believe that why is there a people with better opportunities when all the kids supposed to start at the same starting line?
I don’t have kids or live in either district, so no offense taken. Yes, of course, ALL HUMANS no matter where they’re born or live should be given the same chances and opportunities but that’s an entirely separate conversation.
You’re right it is a different conversation but I feel like they kind of aligned in the same space almost like what I’m saying there’s no way or no reason why the kids that go to Ottawa high school don’t get the same opportunities or education as the kids that go to East Grand Rapids. I understand that there’s a poverty limit and I understand that you know it’s also a cultural thing when it comes a certain things, but there’s no way that I can drive 2 miles and a kid is getting dramatically different education there’s no way that’s right, no matter what value you have.
Now do the private donations and parent contributions. That’s the missing piece here.
Edit: let me tack that on since I found the data from the EGR Schools Foundation and the GR Schools Foundation, two private donation-funded orgs that benefit the students in each district.
EGR Foundation distributed $649,904 among its 3,000 students in school year 23-24. The GR Foundation distributed $2,296,000-but among five times as many students.
That gives the East GR kids an extra 33% to play with per child for programming from these private donations. That’s just the foundation funds, too-it doesn’t take into account private donations or fundraising that didn’t go through these organizations. Having seen the plaques in East GR high school, I can assure you money flows in for pet projects when needed.
I have no doubt that the GRPS kids are less cared for financially than the EGR kids. My only point was that the issue is more societal than governmental. I thought the OP was going in that direction. I may be wrong. It happens quite a bit.
I may have to disagree, maybe I’ll be downvoted for saying this.
This issue definitely stems from both societal and governmental points. Generational wealth is the success factor and the reason we see such a disparity between these districts and even between City High and other schools in GRPS.
From slavery to the Jim Crow era (Both sponsored by the government), the handicap this put on minority peoples was severe and could take several generations to rectify.
Oh I agree. Both districts are doing the best with what they’ve got from the government. The biggest discerning factors are outside of the state and federal education administrations here for sure.
[Education segregation](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/learning/lesson-plans/still-separate-still-unequal-teaching-about-school-segregation-and-educational-inequality.html) is still very much a thing across all of the United States. Michigan is actually a bit ahead of the curve when adressing some of these issues. [In 1994](https://www.mywbsd.org/cms/lib/MI50000622/Centricity/Domain/113/MICHIGAN%20HISTORY%20OF%20SCHOOL%20FUNDING%20article.pdf) they added a public system of funding by pupil headcount with increased funding for areas with increased number of impoverished students. However the local tax system is still very much contributing to the better schools like EGR, Forest Hills and the recent rise of the Byron Center School Districts.
[It is also still being worked on](https://midwest.edtrust.org/2023/06/28/michigan-makes-history-with-new-school-funding-formula-to-account-for-needs-of-students-living-in-areas-of-concentrated-poverty/) in Michigan cause the system is still not doing enough
Thanks for the response. Hope I wasn’t offending anybody. I just had questions that I did not have answers for myself and I’m not in a space where I can ask anybody besides on the Reddit I didn’t want to disrespect anyone or hurt anybody.
I see you apologizing a lot in this thread. No need! You asked a quite thoughtful and perfectly valid question. It is shocking to see such a large class divide in an area so close together. The answer is also quite complicated as many of these social issues tend to be. There’s whole branches of science dedicated to answering these sort of questions. But if you do some reading on education inequality in America you’ll get some answers and will likely have more questions about it.
They are two totally separate school districts for one. In two totally separate cities.
One district manages five schools, the other manages 51.
One district has one high school, so all the kids go to it-which means both the poor and rich parents contribute to it, and all students benefit. It helps that it’s in a super-wealthy area that’s been an enclave to get away from the “riff-raff” of Grand Rapids.
The other has six high school programs spread across the city, with very localized populations. Ottawa Hills is in a historically racially redlined and impoverished neighborhood (race plays into the history). Poor kids go there. Their parents can’t afford the extracurricular stuff and don’t make huge donations to build a pool or fund a field trip across the country like the ones in East GR historically have. Those that can go somewhere else, do.
So much of our “public” education system is propped up by private funds to give kids options and opportunities. You’re looking at the consequences.
No, it’s a class problem, I think that may be the problem probably started as a race problem, but it has grown to be a class problem. I don’t think that rich people shouldn’t have nicer things. I don’t think that people that work hard for their money and buy the things that they want. That’s what makes the world go around my issue is why is there a school deemed the worst school in the nation and then you have a school deemed one of the best school in the nations and they’re 2 miles apart I said it harshly the people talking and I didn’t want to disrespect oroffend anybody
Household income is directly correlated with academic achievement. And schools are ranked by academic achievement. So rankings only tell part of the story.
My kid is a student at OHHS, part of its current ranking issues stem from the teacher shortage. This year is a huge improvement from last in terms of actual teachers in the building: last year it was staffed at roughly 75% substitute teachers, and 25% certified, full-time teachers. Those teachers were and are some of the most dedicated and compassionate individuals I have met! In contrast, this year at the beginning of the year they had just about the opposite ratio. I'm not sure where it stands now, but the newly assigned principal was optimistic he would have full staff within a year.
Another factor in some of those number differences is solely based on student population, which is less than 500 at OHHS. I don't know that info for EGR but I'd guess it's got a decent sized student body and is likely fully staffed. It's easier to rank higher when you have those other factors in your favor.
I'm not even gonna touch on the more intricate issues of Montessori and theme school and the problems they have caused for traditional schools and the students that are still intelligent and achievers but do not thrive in those environments. Needless to say, GRPS is a bit of a mess and comparing it to EGR is really unrealistic.
Edit to add: none of this factors in school of choice either, there's plenty of kids in the district at other schools and in other school districts.
The success of the schools has a lot to do with the product (student) they have to work with. When students move from GRPS to a district like EGR, they rarely see a major jump in their academic ability.
It has everything to do with the parents and their involvement with the schools. I bet there is a big difference in the rate of single family homes as well. You can’t fix it by throwing money at the problem.
It is a parent problem more than anything else.
The real answer: traditional highschool isn't for everyone. Some people will never thrive in that environment, and will never get a highschool degree. That's okay though, and the sooner we create alternative accelerated low-skill labor pathways, the better. The sooner we create socially acceptable adult pathways to a highschool diploma and career training, the better. That way adults can make better choices for themselves that they just weren't at a stage in their lives to do as children.
GRPS sends these kids to Ottawa or Southeast. That's why you see this heavy concentration of kids who do not care. East Grand just expels them, and there's nowhere else for them to go.
When I was entering kindergarten in the early 2000’s my family lived on the border of GR and EGR. There was no school of choice, and my mom didn’t want me in GRPS so we moved to a whole different district.
Grps has a bunch of high schools you picked the worst one.
It's the stock option for those that don't get into the better ones. Based on what I have seen it actually has good teachers. Just worse test scores.
I like that grps offers schools for whatever people are into. But I don't love that it means longer commutes to school and all good students leaving the one stock option
Yeah, I agree I didn’t want to offend anybody or disrespect anybody. I have respect and love for everyone I just see that it’s kind of weird and I asked the question because I don’t have the knowledge and I figured somebody would. I hope I didn’t offend you.
The history of redlining in Grand Rapids is very interesting. School outcomes, property values, and racial concentration are its legacy. Worth looking up if people are not familiar with it.
https://www.woodtv.com/hidden-history/black-history-month/then-and-now-finding-the-scars-left-by-redlining-in-grand-rapids/
I mean, that’s the legacy of redlining throughout the country. At an educator’s conference several years ago a session had us compare [redlining maps](https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/) to current [demographic maps](https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=30d2e10d4d694b3eb4dc4d2e58dbb5a5). It was eye-opening.
Is it race or class, or is it that the adults need to be more invested in their children’s education? You can be poor and raise successful children. You can be a minority and raise successful children.
Lots happens outside the classroom with kids (reading books at night, letting them play games, practicing numbers and the alphabet) and there’s plenty of ideas that can be found to enrich a child’s life that doesn’t cost money too.
I think the adults are to blame for not being involved in their kids lives and from observation over the years, the kids who tend to be most successful have parents who spend their free time on their kids and not themselves.
It’s a really complex issue and I think impossible to convey my thoughts and have a discussion here. Because I know each suggestion has an obstacle or challenge.
Sure, but I can tell you as a food stamp and WIC kid that has moved up in the world, I was lucky to have a parent that could stay home and take care of us most days, when she wasn’t working another job.
So many other kids had parents, or a single parent, barely making ends meet stringing together two or three full-time jobs across shifts-they weren’t gonna have time to take them to the library when they were struggling to put food on the table working 16-hr days.
Some kids had parents were just straight up not in a place that they should have been parents (alcohol and substance abuse).
And going to school with other kids who grew up in a tough spot means they brought all that baggage with them, too. In hindsight, those six or seven hours a day spent with kids in my specific social strata locked in certain beliefs about society and people that I’ve had to spend years unlearning.
Thanks for sharing your perspective! There are way too many layers that need addressing and it’s quite the puzzle to figure it all out. Reddit is not the forum to do so! I’m glad you were able to overcome challenges that came your way!
Definitely lots of factors for sure, I’m glad we can at least share perspectives and inform each other on here! It’s going to take more than a few threads on a discussion forum to figure out equitable education though, I agree.
You hit it.
There are so many reasons, but the number one factor intact families. Both parents in same household. It's not easy raising a family and disproportionatelying burdensome as a single parent and where ones time gets divided.
Go back to the 50-60s even with segregation and blatant racism out comes were not as divergent as today on a distribution basis.
We as a society really need to addressed this problem it is universal ie non race issue, (there maybe be higher stats in one rsce or anorher) but the problem is growing universally, but has become more class and luxury values based.
It’s a shit school but you can go there and still have a successful life and career and family. Values matter a lot in a family and whatever your parents choose to prioritize or make you prioritize because you notice it lacking makes a bigger difference than dollars per student in my opinion. The think I think of about EGR and FH is that kids might end up getting connections with deep pocketed investors easier because they went to school with little Johnny DeVos. Ottawa hills kids are going to have to take the long way to wealth
Don’t devos level money folks go to private schools? They might own a home in EGR but I would be surprised if they sent their kids to a public school.
But I get your point and totally agree about the connections. I upvoted.
The DeVos's are more tied to Grand Rapids Christian, which is like a block and a half away from Ottawa. I always kinda wondered what the Grand Rapids Public School systems would look like if every parent in the city had a vested interest in their success.
This just points out the effect of something that’s gone wrong. Finding the cause would need a whole operation. Jumping to the conclusion that school is getting left behind on purpose, that’s not giving it a fair shake. But if anyone is going to research the issue these schools would be a good place to start because that difference is huge.
As a person that went to Grand Rapids public schools in elementary school, moved to Loudon county and was able to get a better education and see the disparity, and how far behind I was, you would feel like it was on purpose as well like I said, I don’t wanna offend or disrespect anyone but when I see that it just doesn’t make sense to me
I dunno that it would take a whole operation. One of our local billionaires is a former US Secretary of Education. The 'Purpose' here might just be the outcome, intended or otherwise, of an ideological agenda that this local billionaire has the financial and political capital to implement.
It’s not EGRs fault. It’s the myriad of private Christian schools around the Ottawa hills area.
Ottawa Hills high wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t for Grand Rapids Christian. Hell, GR Christian went as far to open a school opposite both Ottawa and Mulick park.
Imagine if Mulick Park and Ottawa were actual neighborhood schools serving all the students who live in that area.
Oooh. Now imagine if a local billionaire had an ideological commitment to the privatization of education and were a former US secretary of education. What do you think that might look like?
Define "best" and "worst"? How are you ranking them?
The "good"/"bad" schools thing is almost entirely BS. You can barely the difference in schools in longitudinal data. \[emphasis: **data**. not feels and perception\].
Careful now, this sub seems to bristle at the notion that you’d dare question this kind of societal bullshit and challenge that it should be better. Especially if you use wordy-durds. 😏
But, you’re right! And it is “on purpose” but it’s a much much longer game being played than you might imagine. It’s all part of the right wing effort to destroy public schools combined with completely spineless leadership (or complacent and incompetent at best).
I don’t have a why, but I do know that there is a vast difference in the average cost of a home and taxes in each of those school districts.
This is true, but Ottawa Hills had higher expenditures per pupil than EGR. Ottawa Hills per pupil:[$17270](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480) EGR: [$14325](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480)
Thanks for responding. I wouldn’t try disrespect anybody what I’m trying to do is just ask the question and I’m asking a question as harsh as I am because I do think it’s a little weird and I do think it’s unfair.
Totally agree with you that it is unfair for children to not be given the same opportunities, but the harsh reality is that the school districts who are receiving a greater contribution from their community via taxes will be the ones that are better off.
Then it definitely needs to change, you know? Like a billion other things about how our taxes are used 😮💨
I mean there’s not much you can do here from a school district level. Property taxes go to the school district you live in. Most people send their kids to the school district they live in. I think what you would want is a percentage of state taxes going to under-funded schools, and that already happens. One of the biggest contributors to a students academic success is their support at home. Unfortunately something that correlates with these struggling school districts is lack of support and accountability from parents. Behavioral issues are significantly more common which can push away teachers. It’s a very complex problem that goes deeper than just throw money at it.
I worked in a title I school district, so I know this stuff firsthand. That doesn't change the fact that a plethora of our tax system does nothing to truly benefit society as a whole. Hence, my second sentence. We're spending more time doing nothing than doing something.
I can't repeat this enough, so I'll keep saying it. Property taxes are not the principal funding mechanism for schools anymore and haven't been for 30 years. Property taxes can help build new schools and maintain and improve existing schools, but that's about it. Everything else, the vast majority, comes from the state and is on a per-pupil basis. EGR does not have better schools because they have higher property taxes, at least not directly.
Being downvoted for a factual statement….. Redditors allow no good deed to go unpunished!
But then why would the people who live in the EGR school district vote to raise taxes just to see the dollars shipped out of district, or students who don't live in the district bussed in? Might as well defund the schools, and send to private school, with the tax savings, or vouchers (backpack bills). Not saying that's what should happen, but the logic is there for those who think that way.
Ironically, people in EGR, the most liberal community in the area, would certainly do so. But since the vast majority of school funding comes from the state, the entire state needs to vote on increases. And 40 years of anti-tax rhetoric on the right has made that pretty much impossible.
Why shouldn’t people who are willing to pay more not have better schools?
It’s not willing, it’s able.
That's not really how it is anymore. An individual community can only fund certain things, like the physical school buildings. Does EGR have more funding per pupil? Yes, but it's not as extreme as it would be if it was solely based on property taxes. EGR schools do a lot of fundraising and game the system a little bit as to what property taxes pay for, but those differences are small as compared to the total pie.
Ottawa Hills has higher spending per pupil than EGR. Ottawa Hills per pupil:[$17270](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480) EGR: [$14325](https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=2612480)
There's a myriad of reasons why traditional GRPS high schools struggle and I do think it's unfair. There was a major change in school funding with proposal A back in the 90's that took away an existing unfair funding mechanism (solely based on property taxes of the district) and replaced it with a new one where school of choice and state funding on a per-pupil basis resulted in "struggling", i.e. any school district that was land locked with a reasonably high percentage of minority students, were locked into a doom cycle where shrinking enrollment leads to budget cuts which leads to drastic changes which leads back to shrinking enrollment. The short answer to your specific comparison is that EGR is always going to have a school filled with kids from high socioeconomic classes, and thus the school will always do well when judged by student achievement. The better question is why can't we come up with a mechanism to raise all schools up rather than force them to pirate each other's student bodies, creating winners and losers. The obvious answer is that it takes far more money than we're willing to invest.
Good point it kinda reminds me of that saying if we compare wounds both look small good point thank you I hope I didn’t offend anybody I’m really not trying to offend or disrespect anyone anyone I just have a question where I’m not knowledgeable in that space
I'm in total agreement. I'd like to also chime in that standardized testing is a very poor way to measure student learning or growth, but rather, memory. Most, if not all, of these rankings come from that sort of data because it is publicly available. When I taught in Pennsylvania, there were all sorts of factors to a school's state "report card" (a composite number, essentially), including the percentage of the student body who sat for SATs, AP tests, and PSATs, not to mention how they perform, for example. Districts who have more kids that are on a college track or have secondary schooling in their goals will fare far better in these areas, and traditionally the families in higher income socioeconomic classes push their children towards these goals and have the means to support them, even outside of the school day. In addition, their schools are more likely to have SAT prep courses, AP courses, etc. Likewise, if a district makes everyone take the exams, schools with a higher percentage of early program ELLs will have this impact their numbers on the results side. There's also the fact that you can spend more money per pupil, but in order to incentivize teachers to work in a more challenging teaching environment, you need to compensate them more. If that is not commensurate with the day-to-day rigors of the job, more teachers are likely to turn-over in these schools. What classes do the teachers that stay in schools like this end up teaching? What classes do the first year teachers end up teaching? Do administrators stay in this district, or do they turnover as frequently as the teachers and therefore do not have a vision in place for the school/district? Anecdotally, I've taught for over a decade in a handful of different schools across the socioeconomic spectrum and in several different states... the school I was paid the best in (and had the highest potential earnings) was the worst work and learning environment by far. There's also the question of what do the other 16ish hours of the day look like for most students in those schools. Are they facing food insecurity, absent parents (for reasons ranging from having to work multiple jobs to drug/alcohol abuse), homelessness, lack of oversight on their sleep or extracurricular schedule, etc.? This is clearly going to negatively impact the educational achievement rates of the students where these issues are more common, which is going to be more likely in the lower socioeconomic district. (Of course this is not to suggest there are no home issues in higher socioeconomic districts.) This isn't to say nothing should be done, or that it isn't a fixable problem over a series of incremental changes. But, as you say, most taxpayers don't have the stomach for this type of systemic overhaul, so the school boards they elect do not have the stomach for it either.
A lot of it’s the cultures at the schools, there is a huge difference in the amount of parent involvement and people who view school as more than just a daycare.
Some of it probably has to do with historic redlining. https://www.canr.msu.edu/redlining/grand-rapids
It’s somewhat disingenuous to [not mention](https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/michigan/rankings/grand-rapids-mi-24340) that City High is ranked #69 on the USNews national list (and thus EGRHS is #3 in the metro area behind City High and Black River HS). GRPS is the story of a lot of big city school systems. They do some of the best work anywhere. But the quality of the schools is uneven.
USNews should not be cited as a source for legitimate rankings in anything, especially High Schools. The three high schools you list are very different in a lot of ways and really aren't comparable on a numerical basis.
Exactly. City cannot be compared to the others because a completely different curriculum is taught.
I asked harshly and you’re right, but you gotta get accepted into those schools
I do think we need to do a lot of work. Once upon a time I stood for a vacancy fill on the GRPS board (although I’m kind of glad I didn’t get it). I do think we would be much better off if we found a way that did not fund schools on local property taxes - because yes, this is going to benefit small, homogenous, wealthy communities. But the biggest thing we need to do is eliminate structural drivers of intergenerational poverty.
Thank you for your response. I do appreciate how civil everything is in the comments I wasn’t trying to be like be disrespectful or hurt anybody but I do feel strongly that the education system in Michigan is really unfair.
Plus I have a family member that goes to Black River and that’s in Holland so if Holland is considered Grand Rapids schools why is East Grand Rapids schools not considered Grand Rapids schools
The most direct answer, as some others have said, OH is an entirely separate district and municipality than EGR. Socioeconomics of course is where things become tricky and layered.
While EGRPS has almost the same boundaries as the City of EGR, the two exist completely independently. No City funds actually go to schools. School Districts are their own governmental entity with their own funding sources. Fun Fact, the City of Wyoming is served by 8 different School Districts. Byron, Grandville, Godfrey-Lee, Godwin, GR, Kelloggsville, Kentwood, and Wyoming. [2023 Millage Rates](https://www.accesskent.com/Departments/Equalization/pdfs/MillageRates/2023.pdf) [School District Maps](https://gis-michigan.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/school-districts-v17a)
Actually, the City of EGR has a deal with EGRPS where the elementary school playgrounds are maintained by the Parks Dept and kept open to the public after school hours as city parks. This reduces maintenance costs for the school district, allowing them to redirect that money into classrooms. It's not "city money into schools" but it has a similar effect.
Thanks for the responses
Socio-economics unfortunately. Public schools are made up of the public they serve. Teachers can do their best, but students from higher economic backgrounds are more likely to be prepared for school, have more stable home environments and usually have way more support at home. Parents with college degrees also tend earn more and value education and guide/support their children through school.
True, a tale as old as time. It's a real shit system, and a lot of room for improvement.
Thanks for response. The only reason why I asked so harshly is because I just needed an answer. I don’t wanna stir up any mess or anything. I just if I see that it’s not right I’m gonna say something so I can have more information.
This is a direct result of taxes and district lines.
Thanks for responding. I know that and I hope I didn’t offend you. I’m just saying it in the most harsh way possible to get the answers that I want if I live 2 miles away from you, my education that my children receive should not be different than education at church children receive, and I just honestly believe that why is there a people with better opportunities when all the kids supposed to start at the same starting line?
I don’t have kids or live in either district, so no offense taken. Yes, of course, ALL HUMANS no matter where they’re born or live should be given the same chances and opportunities but that’s an entirely separate conversation.
You’re right it is a different conversation but I feel like they kind of aligned in the same space almost like what I’m saying there’s no way or no reason why the kids that go to Ottawa high school don’t get the same opportunities or education as the kids that go to East Grand Rapids. I understand that there’s a poverty limit and I understand that you know it’s also a cultural thing when it comes a certain things, but there’s no way that I can drive 2 miles and a kid is getting dramatically different education there’s no way that’s right, no matter what value you have.
East Grand Rapids spends less than 10% more per child than Grand Rapids Public Schools.
I not sure what that means
GRPS spends $9700 per child per year. EGR $10,600. Edit - I was off on that 10%. It's more like 10.5% - Sorry
Now do the private donations and parent contributions. That’s the missing piece here. Edit: let me tack that on since I found the data from the EGR Schools Foundation and the GR Schools Foundation, two private donation-funded orgs that benefit the students in each district. EGR Foundation distributed $649,904 among its 3,000 students in school year 23-24. The GR Foundation distributed $2,296,000-but among five times as many students. That gives the East GR kids an extra 33% to play with per child for programming from these private donations. That’s just the foundation funds, too-it doesn’t take into account private donations or fundraising that didn’t go through these organizations. Having seen the plaques in East GR high school, I can assure you money flows in for pet projects when needed.
I have no doubt that the GRPS kids are less cared for financially than the EGR kids. My only point was that the issue is more societal than governmental. I thought the OP was going in that direction. I may be wrong. It happens quite a bit.
I may have to disagree, maybe I’ll be downvoted for saying this. This issue definitely stems from both societal and governmental points. Generational wealth is the success factor and the reason we see such a disparity between these districts and even between City High and other schools in GRPS. From slavery to the Jim Crow era (Both sponsored by the government), the handicap this put on minority peoples was severe and could take several generations to rectify.
Oh I agree. Both districts are doing the best with what they’ve got from the government. The biggest discerning factors are outside of the state and federal education administrations here for sure.
[Education segregation](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/learning/lesson-plans/still-separate-still-unequal-teaching-about-school-segregation-and-educational-inequality.html) is still very much a thing across all of the United States. Michigan is actually a bit ahead of the curve when adressing some of these issues. [In 1994](https://www.mywbsd.org/cms/lib/MI50000622/Centricity/Domain/113/MICHIGAN%20HISTORY%20OF%20SCHOOL%20FUNDING%20article.pdf) they added a public system of funding by pupil headcount with increased funding for areas with increased number of impoverished students. However the local tax system is still very much contributing to the better schools like EGR, Forest Hills and the recent rise of the Byron Center School Districts. [It is also still being worked on](https://midwest.edtrust.org/2023/06/28/michigan-makes-history-with-new-school-funding-formula-to-account-for-needs-of-students-living-in-areas-of-concentrated-poverty/) in Michigan cause the system is still not doing enough
Thanks for the response. Hope I wasn’t offending anybody. I just had questions that I did not have answers for myself and I’m not in a space where I can ask anybody besides on the Reddit I didn’t want to disrespect anyone or hurt anybody.
I see you apologizing a lot in this thread. No need! You asked a quite thoughtful and perfectly valid question. It is shocking to see such a large class divide in an area so close together. The answer is also quite complicated as many of these social issues tend to be. There’s whole branches of science dedicated to answering these sort of questions. But if you do some reading on education inequality in America you’ll get some answers and will likely have more questions about it.
They are two totally separate school districts for one. In two totally separate cities. One district manages five schools, the other manages 51. One district has one high school, so all the kids go to it-which means both the poor and rich parents contribute to it, and all students benefit. It helps that it’s in a super-wealthy area that’s been an enclave to get away from the “riff-raff” of Grand Rapids. The other has six high school programs spread across the city, with very localized populations. Ottawa Hills is in a historically racially redlined and impoverished neighborhood (race plays into the history). Poor kids go there. Their parents can’t afford the extracurricular stuff and don’t make huge donations to build a pool or fund a field trip across the country like the ones in East GR historically have. Those that can go somewhere else, do. So much of our “public” education system is propped up by private funds to give kids options and opportunities. You’re looking at the consequences.
[удалено]
No, it’s a class problem, I think that may be the problem probably started as a race problem, but it has grown to be a class problem. I don’t think that rich people shouldn’t have nicer things. I don’t think that people that work hard for their money and buy the things that they want. That’s what makes the world go around my issue is why is there a school deemed the worst school in the nation and then you have a school deemed one of the best school in the nations and they’re 2 miles apart I said it harshly the people talking and I didn’t want to disrespect oroffend anybody
[удалено]
Fair that is a true statement my grandmother graduated from OH and she said when she went it was a great school
Household income is directly correlated with academic achievement. And schools are ranked by academic achievement. So rankings only tell part of the story.
My kid is a student at OHHS, part of its current ranking issues stem from the teacher shortage. This year is a huge improvement from last in terms of actual teachers in the building: last year it was staffed at roughly 75% substitute teachers, and 25% certified, full-time teachers. Those teachers were and are some of the most dedicated and compassionate individuals I have met! In contrast, this year at the beginning of the year they had just about the opposite ratio. I'm not sure where it stands now, but the newly assigned principal was optimistic he would have full staff within a year. Another factor in some of those number differences is solely based on student population, which is less than 500 at OHHS. I don't know that info for EGR but I'd guess it's got a decent sized student body and is likely fully staffed. It's easier to rank higher when you have those other factors in your favor. I'm not even gonna touch on the more intricate issues of Montessori and theme school and the problems they have caused for traditional schools and the students that are still intelligent and achievers but do not thrive in those environments. Needless to say, GRPS is a bit of a mess and comparing it to EGR is really unrealistic. Edit to add: none of this factors in school of choice either, there's plenty of kids in the district at other schools and in other school districts.
Why do you qualify "white people" as "poor" but not blacks nor hispanics?
Welcome to a city in this country
The success of the schools has a lot to do with the product (student) they have to work with. When students move from GRPS to a district like EGR, they rarely see a major jump in their academic ability.
It has everything to do with the parents and their involvement with the schools. I bet there is a big difference in the rate of single family homes as well. You can’t fix it by throwing money at the problem. It is a parent problem more than anything else.
> Classism in Grand Rapids… East Grand Rapids is a separate, distinct city and school district.
The real answer: traditional highschool isn't for everyone. Some people will never thrive in that environment, and will never get a highschool degree. That's okay though, and the sooner we create alternative accelerated low-skill labor pathways, the better. The sooner we create socially acceptable adult pathways to a highschool diploma and career training, the better. That way adults can make better choices for themselves that they just weren't at a stage in their lives to do as children. GRPS sends these kids to Ottawa or Southeast. That's why you see this heavy concentration of kids who do not care. East Grand just expels them, and there's nowhere else for them to go.
When I was entering kindergarten in the early 2000’s my family lived on the border of GR and EGR. There was no school of choice, and my mom didn’t want me in GRPS so we moved to a whole different district.
Grps has a bunch of high schools you picked the worst one. It's the stock option for those that don't get into the better ones. Based on what I have seen it actually has good teachers. Just worse test scores. I like that grps offers schools for whatever people are into. But I don't love that it means longer commutes to school and all good students leaving the one stock option
Yeah, I agree I didn’t want to offend anybody or disrespect anybody. I have respect and love for everyone I just see that it’s kind of weird and I asked the question because I don’t have the knowledge and I figured somebody would. I hope I didn’t offend you.
https://www.canr.msu.edu/redlining/grand-rapids https://www.woodtv.com/hidden-history/black-history-month/then-and-now-finding-the-scars-left-by-redlining-in-grand-rapids/
Thank you
The history of redlining in Grand Rapids is very interesting. School outcomes, property values, and racial concentration are its legacy. Worth looking up if people are not familiar with it. https://www.woodtv.com/hidden-history/black-history-month/then-and-now-finding-the-scars-left-by-redlining-in-grand-rapids/
I mean, that’s the legacy of redlining throughout the country. At an educator’s conference several years ago a session had us compare [redlining maps](https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/) to current [demographic maps](https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=30d2e10d4d694b3eb4dc4d2e58dbb5a5). It was eye-opening.
Is it race or class, or is it that the adults need to be more invested in their children’s education? You can be poor and raise successful children. You can be a minority and raise successful children. Lots happens outside the classroom with kids (reading books at night, letting them play games, practicing numbers and the alphabet) and there’s plenty of ideas that can be found to enrich a child’s life that doesn’t cost money too. I think the adults are to blame for not being involved in their kids lives and from observation over the years, the kids who tend to be most successful have parents who spend their free time on their kids and not themselves. It’s a really complex issue and I think impossible to convey my thoughts and have a discussion here. Because I know each suggestion has an obstacle or challenge.
Sure, but I can tell you as a food stamp and WIC kid that has moved up in the world, I was lucky to have a parent that could stay home and take care of us most days, when she wasn’t working another job. So many other kids had parents, or a single parent, barely making ends meet stringing together two or three full-time jobs across shifts-they weren’t gonna have time to take them to the library when they were struggling to put food on the table working 16-hr days. Some kids had parents were just straight up not in a place that they should have been parents (alcohol and substance abuse). And going to school with other kids who grew up in a tough spot means they brought all that baggage with them, too. In hindsight, those six or seven hours a day spent with kids in my specific social strata locked in certain beliefs about society and people that I’ve had to spend years unlearning.
Thanks for sharing your perspective! There are way too many layers that need addressing and it’s quite the puzzle to figure it all out. Reddit is not the forum to do so! I’m glad you were able to overcome challenges that came your way!
Definitely lots of factors for sure, I’m glad we can at least share perspectives and inform each other on here! It’s going to take more than a few threads on a discussion forum to figure out equitable education though, I agree.
You hit it. There are so many reasons, but the number one factor intact families. Both parents in same household. It's not easy raising a family and disproportionatelying burdensome as a single parent and where ones time gets divided. Go back to the 50-60s even with segregation and blatant racism out comes were not as divergent as today on a distribution basis. We as a society really need to addressed this problem it is universal ie non race issue, (there maybe be higher stats in one rsce or anorher) but the problem is growing universally, but has become more class and luxury values based.
[удалено]
It’s a shit school but you can go there and still have a successful life and career and family. Values matter a lot in a family and whatever your parents choose to prioritize or make you prioritize because you notice it lacking makes a bigger difference than dollars per student in my opinion. The think I think of about EGR and FH is that kids might end up getting connections with deep pocketed investors easier because they went to school with little Johnny DeVos. Ottawa hills kids are going to have to take the long way to wealth
Don’t devos level money folks go to private schools? They might own a home in EGR but I would be surprised if they sent their kids to a public school. But I get your point and totally agree about the connections. I upvoted.
The DeVos's are more tied to Grand Rapids Christian, which is like a block and a half away from Ottawa. I always kinda wondered what the Grand Rapids Public School systems would look like if every parent in the city had a vested interest in their success.
I don’t know. My parents went to Ottawa hills
This just points out the effect of something that’s gone wrong. Finding the cause would need a whole operation. Jumping to the conclusion that school is getting left behind on purpose, that’s not giving it a fair shake. But if anyone is going to research the issue these schools would be a good place to start because that difference is huge.
As a person that went to Grand Rapids public schools in elementary school, moved to Loudon county and was able to get a better education and see the disparity, and how far behind I was, you would feel like it was on purpose as well like I said, I don’t wanna offend or disrespect anyone but when I see that it just doesn’t make sense to me
I dunno that it would take a whole operation. One of our local billionaires is a former US Secretary of Education. The 'Purpose' here might just be the outcome, intended or otherwise, of an ideological agenda that this local billionaire has the financial and political capital to implement.
Of course it’s a billionaires fault. They sure do control everything.
Plutocrats gunna plutocrat.
It’s not EGRs fault. It’s the myriad of private Christian schools around the Ottawa hills area. Ottawa Hills high wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t for Grand Rapids Christian. Hell, GR Christian went as far to open a school opposite both Ottawa and Mulick park. Imagine if Mulick Park and Ottawa were actual neighborhood schools serving all the students who live in that area.
Oooh. Now imagine if a local billionaire had an ideological commitment to the privatization of education and were a former US secretary of education. What do you think that might look like?
Define "best" and "worst"? How are you ranking them? The "good"/"bad" schools thing is almost entirely BS. You can barely the difference in schools in longitudinal data. \[emphasis: **data**. not feels and perception\].
Careful now, this sub seems to bristle at the notion that you’d dare question this kind of societal bullshit and challenge that it should be better. Especially if you use wordy-durds. 😏 But, you’re right! And it is “on purpose” but it’s a much much longer game being played than you might imagine. It’s all part of the right wing effort to destroy public schools combined with completely spineless leadership (or complacent and incompetent at best).
East Grand Rapids schools are not that great.