Irvine should be grateful

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
<p>Laguna Hills is nice. Have you been through the neighborhoods lately? And as for HB, just check out SeaCliff, Huntington Harbor, and Main Street. Come on, there's definitely a premium for being able to park your boat on the water by your house. I haven't even mentioned San Clemente, Anaheim Hills, Dana Point, Los Alamitos, Ladera Ranch, Coto de Caza, Laguna Niguel, Laguna Beach, Brea, Villa Park, Cowan Heights, North Tustin, Tustin Ranch, Newport Beach, Newport Coast, Corona del Mar, etc.</p>

<p>Yes, compared to Santa Ana, Anaheim, Garden Grove, Costa Mesa, Orange, and Fullerton; Irvine is pretty nice. But I don't think the difference is vast. I like Irvine because I'm Asian. But if I wasn't, there are so so many other areas that are comparable or better in Orange County.</p>
 
<p>Yes, they are all nice cities. And to each his own. But if you're talking about parents who are concern or hung up about their kids education. </p>

<p>In all sincerity, please tell me which of those cities education is equivalent to Irvine?</p>
 
<p>And by all mean, I am not saying Irvine is the greatest. I would be foolish to say so. </p>

<p>But from a parents' standpoint whereby their children's education is the most important in choosing where they live. Please let me know which of those cities you have mentioned have a great school system. </p>

<p> </p>
 
Oh, I am sorry for not noticing that you'd mentioned Sunny Hills and Troy High School. 2 schools out of Fullerton? Please do inform that the whole city of Fullerton have a good educational system.
 
teacher -- IMO, the second list of cities you noted is much more comparable than Laguna Hills and HB. Comps to Irvine need to be somewhere the folks here would consider a viable alternative. Anaheim Hills, Villa Park, Ladera, Laguna Niguel -- definitely. My family looked into all of those. For us, while each had its own merits, Irvine was the one place that had everything each of the others had -- all in one. All that Irvine offers plus a far more central and accessable location are tough to match up against.
 
<p>What will happen to the quality of education when those Low - Medium income homes are built.</p>

<p><em>The city of Irvine must add 35,660 housing units over the next seven years, according to recommendations handed down Thursday by the Southern California Association of Governments.</em> </p>

<p>Two kids per home on average that equals about 70k worth of low income children going to Irvine schools. </p>

<p>Couldn't this hurt Irvine's desirability?</p>
 
trrenter,



Maybe TIC will build these west of Culver, North of the I-5... which means they'll dump them into the Tustin School District. Ha! I'm sure they are going to contest it, the # of units alone is unreasonable IMO.
 
http://fourstory.org/pages/stories/017-merriam-irvinehithard.htm


<em>SCAG is recommending that Irvine build 35,660 housing units over the next seven years, of which 21,282 must be affordable housing units. That’s over 3000 affordable housing units per year that will have to be built in Irvine over the next seven years. Prior to the mandate from SCAG, <strong>Irvine had already planned to build 8833 housing units in their city, 5274 of which are designated affordable housing units.</strong> This represents over 750 affordable housing units per year that were already going to be built during the next seven years. Most importantly, most of the vacant land in Irvine that is available for residential development is already locked into development contracts or agreements.</em>








As I've said before, I have no objections to affordable housing projects, so long as priority is given to people who already live or work in Irvine. If we're going to subsidize someone, I rather have the $ go to housing to the folks working at Target, Whole Foods, Costco, etc. here in Irvine. The affordable housing units should be spread out across the city and never concentrated into a single location.



 
<p>They are contesting of course but stopping it is a different thing.</p>

<p>It was a mandate not a request. </p>

<p>From my experiance the low income familes do not try to live up to the standards of the newer community. I hope that doesn't happen in Irvine.</p>

<p>I do know the quality of education is better in this area so the low income kids will have some catch up to do.</p>

<p>When I read that article that was the first thing I thought about.</p>

<p> </p>
 
When I went to school in Irvine, they had low income students from the El Toro & Tustin Marine bases and it didn't effect the quality of education. The school districts are very clever at hiding test scores from less than optimal performers. One way they do this is to send lower achieving students to one of the "alternative" schools if they feel they may lower a school's median.
 
<p>Lets just be honest here. Affordable housing is a nice way of saying "poor" in some people's mind. I can understand that poor children tends to come from an environment where the odds are stacked against them to achieve.</p>

<p>But if you put these children in a nurturing environment where it is stress that education is important. They will not succeed?</p>
 
<p>reason,</p>

<p>Look at school rankings if you are coming form a school with a low state ranking you are "probably" not at the same level as a kid from a school with a high state ranking. The curriculum will be different too.</p>

<p>Just like kids going from low ranking inner city schools to college. They struggle some because they were not given the same quality of education.</p>

<p>I don't know if they will or won't succed with a new environment. This isn't an indictment on the children but the schools they go to.</p>

<p>I do know if you are taught math at one level and move to an area where math is taught at a higher level you will struggle. Then those struggling children take the mandated state testing and it lowers the shools scoring.</p>

<p> </p>
 
<p>I suppose it depends on what age the child is. If he's of high school age. I can see how it would be very difficult to catch up to his peers from a "better" neighborhood.</p>

<p>But a poor child at the elementary school level. He or she might have a better chance.</p>
 
<p>agreed but they would still be behind.</p>

<p>If a second grader that is learning addition and subtraction gets sent to a school up to multiplication and division it will be a challenge. To both student and teacher for them to catch up.</p>

<p>Multiply that by 35k families across the district with children ranging in ages. Might not be an easy task.</p>

<p> </p>
 
<p>If it's not an indictment of the children but rather than the school system. Then lets not concern ourselves of who's moving into the neighborhood.</p>

<p>I believe that these children were born into poverty. They did not choose it. So spare me this worry of "Oh, they're moving to our side of the tracks."</p>
 
<p>I beg to differ with you there. I didn't speak or write a word of English. I went to schools that are considered below par. My parents were poor. </p>

<p>Yet, this poor kid was placed in programs above AP. Actually, I was placed in Mentally Gifted Mind classes. What is now known as Gifted and Talented Education.</p>

<p>So please don't equate children from poor backgrounds as less intelligent. </p>
 
And I can name so many friends from poor background whom are now doctors, lawyers, etc. And yes, they were a product of the subpar school system. That according to you is not good enough for them to catch up with kids from "better" neighborhood. Spare me.
 
I grew up in the barrios in a gang infested neighborhood full of homeboys. My neighbors were “cholos” with Impala low riders. Growing up poor and culturally deprived does not mean that one could not succeed in education. I got into the Claremont Colleges by affirmative action. My test score were not high like the Asian kids. That was too many years ago. Many of my friends did not go to 4 a year college but a 4 year prison. East LA and the neighborhood where I grew up had the worst gang problems. Education gave me a chance and opened the door for me. I believe in those who are bound in their economic hardship could contribute to the school culturally and may not be intellectually like the Asian students. The diversity allows students to learn about compassion for other ethnic cultures and interact with kids outside their race. Some of my Chicano friends went to Stanford and became good politicians in LA. No, the mayor was not in my class.



I have opportunities to set my business and invest in Irvine but I chose to be in Santa Ana where I can be an active voice and contribute to a society that so many people have run away from. I do visit my root where I grew up. I missed the homemade Tamales and Carne Asada Taco stands in my old neighborhood.
 
<p>ez cowboy the only tracks go right through Irvine so moving from one side to the other.....</p>

<p>I didn't equate socio economic background to intelligence in any of my points.</p>

<p>My point was based on the quality of schools in low income area's.</p>

<p>Currie is ranked a 4 out of 10 with an api score of 629. Take an Irvine school that ranks a 10 with an api score of 920 or so. You don't think there is a difference in curriculum or standards. That the kid coming from this school is not at a disadvantage.</p>

<p>Are you suggesting a kid in south central is getting the same education as a kid in Irvine? </p>

<p>When you have a child and you are moving what is the first thing you look at? Schools. I am happy that you were able to succeed that is great. </p>

<p>It doesn't change the fact that generally lower income area's don't have the same quality of schools as those in higher income area's. </p>

<p>It also doesn't change the fact that if they come from these lower quality schools they will need to be brought up to speed. Taxing both student and teacher if they are brought in mass. </p>

<p>I didn't say it couldn't be done. I said it would concern me as a parent.</p>

<p> </p>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top