Renting for better schools

[jamesbond007]

We currently own a condo and our PITI+HOA is $2250/month in the SF Bay Area. While our school district is considered very good, our condo is in a small pocket where our assigned schools are bad and are showing no signs of improvement. DD is 7 ad she is doing well for her age. her reading is at fifth grade level, and we are thinking that she is getting under served. I don't blame the teacher as their job is to be equitable to everyone in the class. When I compared to other schools in the area the quality of work, they give home is much better compared to our school. Checking the CA school dashboard supports this anecdote.


This got us thinking whether we should rent a house near those schools that we like until DD completes her high school. Rent our condo out. This way we would spend about $500 or so extra per month assuming our condo would be occupied 100% of the time. Another though we got is to sell the condo, take the profits (We can make about $350K after paying off remaining mortgage and broker commission), rent elsewhere. Not sure what to do. DW is a SAHM and spends a lot of time with DD. I do too. Does it make financial sense to rent out and rent elsewhere?


PS: Asking the district to change schools is a no go as our district conducts lottery even to get into home schools. Overcrowded.

[boarder42]

My 2c being a "lesser" school builds more character for the kids there - Most learning is a product of how much the parents are involved and encouraging it more than what goes on in a class room.  Sounds like you have your bases covered there.  Why not just keep the same school and supplement at home you already have a SAHP.

[jamesbond007]

Yes. That has been our mindset all these years. But FOMO.

[FLBiker]

We're currently in a similar approach, although our intervention wouldn't be moving but private school.  In some ways, I really like the public school (they have French immersion, cafeteria food is homecooked) but academically, I've been underwhelmed.  DD is 6, and could certainly do harder work.  At the same time, I think it's good for her to have diverse (economically) classmates, instead of just the folks who can afford to live in a particular neighborhood or go to a particular private school.  I went to pretty lousy public schools for my elementary years, and later went to fancy pants public schools.  I enjoyed the experience at the lousier ones much better, as the fancy ones had pretty relentless clique culture.  DW went to a working class public school with a good gifted program, which may have been the best of both worlds.

Personally, I'm fine with the public school, but DW has said that, if DD is saying she's really bored come 3rd or 4th grade, she might want to do private school through 8th grade, followed by an IB public high school.  There were exceptions (in other words, good teachers), but boredom was probably my dominant experience all the way through grad school.  School was just a means to an end, with the goal being to get my grades for the least work possible.  As a result, I don't really expect school to be the place where she learns.  I'd like for her to be safe and enjoy her time there.  Anything more than that would be a bonus.  So far, so good.

As I write this, though, I can't help but see how my negative experience has really colored my expectations.  I should probably just listen to my wife. :)

[thesis]

My 2c being a "lesser" school builds more character for the kids there - Most learning is a product of how much the parents are involved and encouraging it more than what goes on in a class room.  Sounds like you have your bases covered there.  Why not just keep the same school and supplement at home you already have a SAHP.

+1

I think a lot of parents miss the big picture, choosing instead to worry about academics as if success depends on junior ending up at a top college. I somehow managed to graduate with a bachelors in a social science from what I consider a glorified community college, and I still got into software, where I earn more than most of my friends and currently have a decently sizable 'stache. If junior wants to go to Yale, staying put could be a problem, but I think people need to get over this idea that academic success equals life success.

Demonstrate the value of learning, provide a loving home. That's really the best any parent can do, IMHO. The rest is field-dressing, obsession with things outside of one's control, and cultural optics that let you fit in with other people who mistake the forest for the trees.

I see a lot of people on these forums also worrying about funding their child's college education. They act like the universe depends on it, but if you can't pay for something, don't. So many parents are obsessed with looking good in this regard. I guess culture has decided you're a terrible parent if you don't sacrifice your future for these dubious advantages for your kid, but I find them kind of absurd. But who knows? I don't have any kids, so perhaps my opinions are quite limited here.

[ChpBstrd]

DD is 7 ad she is doing well for her age. her reading is at fifth grade level, and we are thinking that she is getting under served. I don't blame the teacher as their job is to be equitable to everyone in the class.

How many books do you read to her per day? Do you play flash cards or anything like that? In my experience, pairing academics with parental attention transfers a kid's love for parents into a love of learning. The things you do together often become the things they are good at.

The aggregated test scores we use to rank schools should actually be seen as a ranking of the parents who send their kids to those schools. And yes, it is often people of low wealth who are unable or for whatever reason don't spend at least a few hours per week doing academics and reading with their kids. It's part of the cycle of poverty, but distracted high-paid professionals can fall into that trap too.

Last points:

1) Be sure to find out if DD needs glasses, has dyslexia, can hear well, etc.
2) Your DD is a unique person, and her strengths might be something like music, athletics, creativity, social/communication/politics, or a number of other "intelligences" not measured by standardized testing.
3) A lot of kids who had to do the education-by-Zoom thing in the last 3 semesters have fallen behind the previously established standards, so if that's the case maybe don't worry - just double down on efforts to catch up.

[iris lily]

I live in the urban core and knew of at least two neighborhood families that rented small apartments out in the same toney suburb to get into that toney school district.

I guess that rent was cheaper than private school tuition. Or, Maybe they wanted that particular public school because ….?  My urban core failing city school system DOES have a magnet high school that is very very highly rated, but I don’t know if their kids couldn’t get into that or what exactly.

I wouldn’t send my children to the crappy public schools here where their peers are Not interested in academics And all of the family problems that come with extreme poverty show up daily in a classroom. But neither what I think it’s important for my children to have THE BEST School on the side of the state either. There are private schools that seemed middle class, and down to earth, and would be fine for my kid. This is all theoretical since I don’t have children.

[trollwithamustache]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

[boarder42]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

[roomtempmayo]

@jamesbond007 In our area, all you have to do is rent in the defined geography for the first semester.  After that, if you change addresses the child is grandfathered in, and all subsequent siblings are as well.

It might be worth checking into whether you have to actually live in the district perpetually, or just to get started.

[jamesbond007]

Thank you for the perspectives. The reason I asked this question is to make sure I am thinking correctly. We both grew up poor and I know how it is for families who are struggling to spend time with their kids. We spend close to 4 hours every weekday with DD with her homework, reading books, explaining/demonstrating concepts etc. But looking back at our childhoods, while the diversity helped, we do think it is important to have a little bit of competition from other students in terms of academics. This is because DD is doing very well for her grade. She is on 2nd grade right now and she already does multiplication, basic algebra word problems etc. We had a feeling that the current school she is in is not providing enough push so she could take on more challenging work. hence the question.

[jamesbond007]

@jamesbond007 In our area, all you have to do is rent in the defined geography for the first semester.  After that, if you change addresses the child is grandfathered in, and all subsequent siblings are as well.

It might be worth checking into whether you have to actually live in the district perpetually, or just to get started.

Unfortunately, where I live, there is a lottery for kids to get into their assigned home school. So this is not an option.

[roomtempmayo]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

[ixtap]

The best predictors of long term success are parental involvement and exposure to diversity.

Also, seven is kind of a hard time to move. Consider moving when the kid would be going to a new school anyway, unless they act start showing signs of disengaging from school work before then.

[Metalcat]

By "bad", what do you mean?

If by "bad", you mean frankly unsafe and the teachers are openly spewing bigotry, then yeah, move.

However, if you mean "bad" in that the school is academically weaker, then you can easily compensate for this as a proactive and involved parent.

Pay attention to your kid, see if they're thriving, enjoying school, being challenged enough on certain topics, and if not, then add enrichment activities to their life.

A "better" school isn't necessarily better for YOUR KID.

Focus on being a really great parent, don't fall for bullshit. Just be a really great parent.

[ChpBstrd]

Thank you for the perspectives. The reason I asked this question is to make sure I am thinking correctly. We both grew up poor and I know how it is for families who are struggling to spend time with their kids. We spend close to 4 hours every weekday with DD with her homework, reading books, explaining/demonstrating concepts etc. But looking back at our childhoods, while the diversity helped, we do think it is important to have a little bit of competition from other students in terms of academics. This is because DD is doing very well for her grade. She is on 2nd grade right now and she already does multiplication, basic algebra word problems etc. We had a feeling that the current school she is in is not providing enough push so she could take on more challenging work. hence the question.

Ah, I misinterpreted. Does the school have one of those programs which used to be called "gifted and talented"?

[Metalcat]

Thank you for the perspectives. The reason I asked this question is to make sure I am thinking correctly. We both grew up poor and I know how it is for families who are struggling to spend time with their kids. We spend close to 4 hours every weekday with DD with her homework, reading books, explaining/demonstrating concepts etc. But looking back at our childhoods, while the diversity helped, we do think it is important to have a little bit of competition from other students in terms of academics. This is because DD is doing very well for her grade. She is on 2nd grade right now and she already does multiplication, basic algebra word problems etc. We had a feeling that the current school she is in is not providing enough push so she could take on more challenging work. hence the question.

Is she getting frustrated with the lack of challenge? Is it affecting her performance and mood?

What benefit would she get from "being pushed more" academically as a young child?

Seriously? I say this as someone who was an academic super star myself with medals and shit. What do you think it will actually do for her?

If she's getting a level appropriate education, enjoying herself, and getting excellent grades, then why indoctrinate her with the message that she always has to do more?

Why not instead take her extra energy and motivate her to take on extra curricular activities, like volunteering together as a family? Or even just taking up a hobby or learning new skills? Why not start a huge personal finance learning project with her? That will actually help her long term.

What need are you trying to meet by having her work harder at school than she actually has to in order to become appropriately educated?

Why was I a superstar student? It sure as shit wasn't because I was pushed to do so, it's because being a nerd made me happy, and I *needed* the intense stimulation of extra work to prevent me from getting distracted and unhappy in school.

Don't focus on trying to raise the highest performing student you can, focus on trying to raise the most healthy, balanced, and resilient human that you can.

Pay attention to if she's happy and thriving. And if she's happy, and thriving, and learning, protect that, don't pay a premium to threaten it.

I may be wrong, you didn't say she's happy and thriving. But *if* she is, then ask yourself very seriously what you think you are trying to actually give her that she doesn't already have.

No one, and I mean NO ONE has ever had their life dramatically improved by being out in a harder elementary school unless is was clearly needed in order to resolve a *problem* due to understimulation.

[jamesbond007]

Thank you for the perspectives. The reason I asked this question is to make sure I am thinking correctly. We both grew up poor and I know how it is for families who are struggling to spend time with their kids. We spend close to 4 hours every weekday with DD with her homework, reading books, explaining/demonstrating concepts etc. But looking back at our childhoods, while the diversity helped, we do think it is important to have a little bit of competition from other students in terms of academics. This is because DD is doing very well for her grade. She is on 2nd grade right now and she already does multiplication, basic algebra word problems etc. We had a feeling that the current school she is in is not providing enough push so she could take on more challenging work. hence the question.

Is she getting frustrated with the lack of challenge? Is it affecting her performance and mood?

What benefit would she get from "being pushed more" academically as a young child?

Seriously? I say this as someone who was an academic super star myself with medals and shit. What do you think it will actually do for her?

If she's getting a level appropriate education, enjoying herself, and getting excellent grades, then why indoctrinate her with the message that she always has to do more?

Why not instead take her extra energy and motivate her to take on extra curricular activities, like volunteering together as a family? Or even just taking up a hobby or learning new skills? Why not start a huge personal finance learning project with her? That will actually help her long term.

What need are you trying to meet by having her work harder at school than she actually has to in order to become appropriately educated?

Why was I a superstar student? It sure as shit wasn't because I was pushed to do so, it's because being a nerd made me happy, and I *needed* the intense stimulation of extra work to prevent me from getting distracted and unhappy in school.

Don't focus on trying to raise the highest performing student you can, focus on trying to raise the most healthy, balanced, and resilient human that you can.

Pay attention to if she's happy and thriving. And if she's happy, and thriving, and learning, protect that, don't pay a premium to threaten it.

I may be wrong, you didn't say she's happy and thriving. But *if* she is, then ask yourself very seriously what you think you are trying to actually give her that she doesn't already have.

No one, and I mean NO ONE has ever had their life dramatically improved by being out in a harder elementary school unless is was clearly needed in order to resolve a *problem* due to understimulation.

Thank you. No. She is not under stimulated. She is happy. We go out for walks/runs/hikes, play board games together. Travel, explain history etc. As I mentioned this is our FOMO kicking in due to the circumstances that we grew up in. I needed this pep talk. Thank you.

[Metalcat]

Thank you. No. She is not under stimulated. She is happy. We go out for walks/runs/hikes, play board games together. Travel, explain history etc. As I mentioned this is our FOMO kicking in due to the circumstances that we grew up in. I needed this pep talk. Thank you.

My pleasure.

FOMO is toxic, it's the stupid cultural devil on your shoulder telling you that you and your life are never good enough, even when the goodness is staring you right in the face.

You have a happy, engaged kid who is enjoying school and doing well in it. Protect that. Protect it ferociously.

And if something from your childhood is warping your perspective, then work on that. Process your childhood and stop letting it have influence over your adulthood. If it isn't serving you, then do the work, process the experiences, and move past them.

I repeat, you have a happy, engaged kid who is doing REALLY well. Do what you need to do to get rid of the voice that needles you to fuck that up for her.

[roomtempmayo]

Thank you for the perspectives. The reason I asked this question is to make sure I am thinking correctly.

Millions of Americans have done exactly what you're contemplating, which is basically moving to a cluster of predominantly rich, predominantly white people to advance the interests of their children over those with fewer resources. 

Whether that is "correct" thinking is up to you.  It's legal, and people do it.

[trollwithamustache]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

sure, the kids may well turn out to be D-bags. But, the better ranked the school, the easier it is to find better employment after graduation. Here in California, you cannot seriously compare the value of a UC degree to a CalState degree, the cal state system is a joke.

[Metalcat]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

sure, the kids may well turn out to be D-bags. But, the better ranked the school, the easier it is to find better employment after graduation. Here in California, you cannot seriously compare the value of a UC degree to a CalState degree, the cal state system is a joke.

Yeah, and a kid with excellent grades and a childhood filled with interesting extra curriculars, including a longstanding history of volunteering with their family, is more likely to get into a really great college than a kid pushed into a harder school whose performance starts suffering, and has less time and energy for doing really interesting things outside of school.

A happy, healthy, thriving kid who lives a genuinely interesting life outside of school will likely have better outcomes no matter what they do than a kid who feels constant pressure to live up to external expectations.

[boarder42]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

sure, the kids may well turn out to be D-bags. But, the better ranked the school, the easier it is to find better employment after graduation. Here in California, you cannot seriously compare the value of a UC degree to a CalState degree, the cal state system is a joke.

Yeah, and a kid with excellent grades and a childhood filled with interesting extra curriculars, including a longstanding history of volunteering with their family, is more likely to get into a really great college than a kid pushed into a harder school whose performance starts suffering, and has less time and energy for doing really interesting things outside of school.

A happy, healthy, thriving kid who lives a genuinely interesting life outside of school will likely have better outcomes no matter what they do than a kid who feels constant pressure to live up to external expectations.

The education syndicate in this country has a great hold on marketing and how to convince parents what their kids need.  Even in a forum filled with people who can ignore most of the marketing bloat the education of children and status they perceive their children will receive in the market place still out weighs basic common sense.

[Metalcat]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

sure, the kids may well turn out to be D-bags. But, the better ranked the school, the easier it is to find better employment after graduation. Here in California, you cannot seriously compare the value of a UC degree to a CalState degree, the cal state system is a joke.

Yeah, and a kid with excellent grades and a childhood filled with interesting extra curriculars, including a longstanding history of volunteering with their family, is more likely to get into a really great college than a kid pushed into a harder school whose performance starts suffering, and has less time and energy for doing really interesting things outside of school.

A happy, healthy, thriving kid who lives a genuinely interesting life outside of school will likely have better outcomes no matter what they do than a kid who feels constant pressure to live up to external expectations.

The education syndicate in this country has a great hold on marketing and how to convince parents what their kids need.  Even in a forum filled with people who can ignore most of the marketing bloat the education of children and status they perceive their children will receive in the market place still out weighs basic common sense.

Honestly, it freaks me out when I read it. The programming is strong.

[trollwithamustache]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

sure, the kids may well turn out to be D-bags. But, the better ranked the school, the easier it is to find better employment after graduation. Here in California, you cannot seriously compare the value of a UC degree to a CalState degree, the cal state system is a joke.

Yeah, and a kid with excellent grades and a childhood filled with interesting extra curriculars, including a longstanding history of volunteering with their family, is more likely to get into a really great college than a kid pushed into a harder school whose performance starts suffering, and has less time and energy for doing really interesting things outside of school.

A happy, healthy, thriving kid who lives a genuinely interesting life outside of school will likely have better outcomes no matter what they do than a kid who feels constant pressure to live up to external expectations.

Moving to a good school district doesn't prevent any of this.

Although I can definetly say that lots of parents in our rich district mailed it in since it was the schools job.

[Metalcat]

We did this. you can spend 50k a year to send your kid to a top tier private school. Or you can move one of several public high school districts in the SF/Bay Area that are in the top 10 and 20 high school lists for CA and have a crap ton of kids go to Ivy League schools ect. Its a no brainer.

Yep bc ivy league schools = success

sure, the kids may well turn out to be D-bags. But, the better ranked the school, the easier it is to find better employment after graduation. Here in California, you cannot seriously compare the value of a UC degree to a CalState degree, the cal state system is a joke.

Yeah, and a kid with excellent grades and a childhood filled with interesting extra curriculars, including a longstanding history of volunteering with their family, is more likely to get into a really great college than a kid pushed into a harder school whose performance starts suffering, and has less time and energy for doing really interesting things outside of school.

A happy, healthy, thriving kid who lives a genuinely interesting life outside of school will likely have better outcomes no matter what they do than a kid who feels constant pressure to live up to external expectations.

Moving to a good school district doesn't prevent any of this.

Although I can definetly say that lots of parents in our rich district mailed it in since it was the schools job.

I never said that moving to a better school district prevented this. Honestly, I don't even know how you would get that notion from my posts in this thread.

But having the attitude of "I have to spend more to move to a more expensive neighbourhood just so that my already high performing kid can feel more institutional pressure to work harder at school just because she can" very much could prevent it.

[elliha]

There is a great opportunity for individual learning if school is not challenging. If homework is easily completed you can read a book about something you like instead, play an educational or interesting game, go to the park, take her to activities etc etc etc. A love and drive to learn on your own is a gift for live, schoolwork at that age is to make that possible but she already knows enough to start now. I am not against school tailoring work or challenging students but you can often do well even if that doesn't happen. I would also consider challenging her in areas where she is not that good. I try to inspire my daughter to improve herself in sports for example. She is never going to be a professional, I can say that much at age 9. It is not her strong side but she still has a body that needs to move and she can improve herself and reach development she didn't expect at the beginning. She is doing well in school and at this point she does well with her own reading plus school and with talking and discussing things with us. I teach her about maths that will come in a year or two to stimulate her interest in maths which is her strongest subject. She does a bit of choir, for fun, and get the joy of music. I had hoped to find her some further musical education this year but I had to accept that this would not be possible with our schedule. Maybe next semester, maybe it will have to wait until next year but that is life.