Talk:Bank Street College of Education

.

External links

How are the two external links relevant to this article? Simon12 02:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Bank Street College of Education

I notice that a privacy hold has been put on the Bank Street College of Education wiki page because of content that has been repeatedly added and deleted. The articles (NY Post and Fox News) that are cited in the text in question refer to an the Bank Street School for Children, not the Bank Street College of Education. Is there a way to have this content fact checked before it is locked in place on the incorrect page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estudiante70 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

so this letter from the BSC website is a figment of our imagination? I get it, you're in damage control mode. But don't censor wikipedia for it.

https://www.bankstreet.edu/campus-beyond/news/2016/07/03/letter-to-the-community-about-our-racial-justice-a/444/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by SWF88 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Bank Street College of Education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120417001303/http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/Carnegie.pdf to http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Publications/PDF/Carnegie.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:47, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Request for discussion: Which logo(s) to include in infobox?

As disclosed above on this talk page and on my user page, I have a COI and thus am using this talk page to discuss changes with neutral editors.

I believe this article will be improved with the addition of the Bank Street College of Education logo to the infobox. Bank Street College of Education logos can be found publicly at https://www.bankstreet.edu/logos/. Here's where it gets a little bit tricky: On that page, under the heading Main Divisions > Bank Street College of Education, you can see that there are two versions of the logo: a standard horizontal treatment and as a circle.

My inclination is that the horizontal logo should be the only version to appear in the infobox for Bank Street College of Education and that it should appear at the top of the infobox (in the "image" field rather than in the "logo" field). But I'd like neutral editors to make that determination, please.

The infoboxes for nearly all university Featured Articles display a seal image (typically round) at the top of the infobox and a logo at the bottom. For two examples, see Texas Tech University and Florida Atlantic University. That convention would seem to suggest that for consistency, the infobox for this Bank Street College of Education article should be updated to include the round version of its logo at the top and the horizontal version at the bottom. But I see these disadvantages to doing so:

1. The round Bank Street College of Education logo is not a seal. It is a logo.
2. The horizontal version is considered by Bank Street College of Education to be its primary or "standard logo," and the round version is an alternate. (See the Visual Style Guide PDF linked from their Logos page).
3. The round and horizontal version of the logo are visually similar and it may be redundant to include both. They share the leafy "B" mark and the same colors and font face. This degree of similarity is not the case for the vast majority of Featured Articles and Good Articles for universities when they include a round logo/seal and a horizontal logo. For example, see how dissimilar the seal and the logo are for Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The only counter example I've found is from the Good Article McGill University -- the university uses a simplified version of its seal in its logo, and thus the round seal and the horizontal logo are visually similar.

I can only find one precedent for having just one logo appear in the infobox: the Featured Article Shimer College.

Can other editors weigh in on what's most appropriate here, please? Thank you.

-- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 17:16, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed change: Remove parents from notable people section

Request: In the section Notable People > School for Children alumni, please remove this sentence:

The SFC has both notable alumni and has at times been popular among celebrities for educating their children, including Robert DeNiro, Bill Cosby, William Hurt and Raul Julia.

Explanation: The statement does not cite any sources, and the What Not To Include section of the WikiProject Schools article guidelines states, "lists or detailed information about… parents of current or former pupils… is usually inappropriate."

Thank you. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 19:22, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

 Done The requested sentence has been omitted. As the COI editor has expressed a concern regarding information in the article which was not referenced, a general cleanup of those items has been made, and items which were unreferenced or referenced only by the college regarding their programs has been omitted. Much of that material was also highly promotional, and as such, should not have been included. With regards to the logo and the seal, both may be used in the infobox. Please upload the images and their appropriate use licenses through the File Upload Wizard and then return to this page with the filenames to be added to the article. Regards,  Spintendo  20:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed change: Restructure article with added citations

Proposed change: Update to a new version, this userspace draft: User:Danielklotz/Bank_Street_College_of_Education.

Reason why: The current structure of this article makes it difficult to improve or expand the article. So, I have worked to bring this article's structure in line with the article structure guidelines from WikiProject Universities and the article structure guidelines from WikiProject Schools. As an institution, Bank Street College of Education is unusual because it is half grad school and half K-8 school. So, when both wikiprojects recommend a section, the new draft has just one section (e.g., both guidelines suggest a "History" section). For the rest, I created two new sections with subsections -- one for the grad school and one for the school for children. Those might be thought of as "mini articles" within the article.

Because restructuring is the focus of this new draft, I followed three principles:

1. Minimize changes to the content itself.
2. Only add new content when it is needed to conform to the wikiproject guidelines.
3. When possible, add additional source citations to existing content.

Here's the diff comparison: current article vs. new draft.

My intention is that this new structure, in line with wikiproject guidelines, will make it easier for editors to improve and expand this article. I welcome questions and feedback, and of course other editors are welcome to make changes to my draft before or after it is implemented. Thank you.

-- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 14:26, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Reply 8-FEB-2020

  Edit request declined  

• Text from the proposal was found to be insufficiently paraphrased from the source material. All submissions for an article need to be written using an editor's own words and phrases.

Regards,  Spintendo  16:17, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Notes

@Spintendo: Understood. I will provide my proposed improvements as a series of smaller, more specific edit requests rather than as one single rewrite. Thank you for making the time to review. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 17:34, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed change (for discussion): Restructuring the article

I have a disclosed conflict of interest. I am proposing changes and requesting input.

As an institution, Bank Street College of Education is unusual because it is half grad school and half K-8 school. That means that this article's structure should take its cues from the article structure guidelines from WikiProject Universities and the from WikiProject Schools. Currently, it does not follow either, and that creates a few problems:

1. The current ad hoc structure leads to confusion for readers. For example, when the current article covers the institution's accreditations, it is it unclear whether a given accreditation applies to the grad school, to the school for children, or to both.
2. While the grad school and children's school are Bank Street's primarily offerings and the main sources of its notability, the structure of the current article makes that difficult or impossible for readers to see, because the current structure gives undue weight to less notable Bank Street programs.
3. It is difficult for editors to expand or improve this article until its fundamental structure is improved.

I propose keeping three of the level-2 headings (History, References, External Links) but then dividing the rest of the existing article into three sections (Bank Street Graduate School of Education, Bank Street School for Children, Other Programs) and "shuffling" the existing content of the article within those sections. The sections on the grad school and the school for children may be thought of as "mini articles" within the article, so that their content can be guided over time by the guidelines from WP:UNI and WP:WPSCH, respectively.

The current structure of the middle part of the article is this (numbers included for clarity):

Current structure
1 History 1.1 Founding and beginnings 1.2 Presidents 2 Academics 2.1 Accreditation 2.2 School and programs 2.2.1 School for Children 2.2.2 Head Start 3 Center for Children's Literature 4 Bank Street Bookstore 5 Notable people 5.1 Graduate School alumni 5.2 School for Children alumni 6 References 7 External links

I propose changing the structure of the article to this, which is more in line with the above-linked article structure guidelines from WP:UNI and WP:WPSCH:

Proposed new structure
History Presidents Bank Street Graduate School of Education Academics Graduate school alumni Bank Street School for Children School structure Admissions School for Children alumni Other Programs Bank Street Head Start Center for Children's Literature Bank Street Bookstore References External Links

The content from the existing article can be rearranged to fit this new structure without requiring rewriting aside from changing the headings. I request that the current headings 2 through 5 be replaced with the new headings I've just proposed, and content moved into that new set of headings as described below:

How content can be rearranged into the new structure

History Remove the level 3 headline "Founding and beginnings" (it's redundant) but keep the content from below that heading in the current article. Presidents – no changes Bank Street Graduate School of Education Academics Insert first paragraph from 2.1 in current article Graduate school alumni Insert content from 5.1 in current article Bank Street School for Children Insert content from 2.2.1 in current article Insert second paragraph (a single sentence) from 2.1 in current article (or delete it; it's redundant) School for Children alumni Insert content from 5.2 in current article Other Programs Bank Street Head Start Insert content from 2.2.2 in current article Center for Children's Literature Insert content from 3 in current article Bank Street Bookstore Insert content from 4 in current article

Of course, once this restructuring or "shuffling around" is completed there is plenty more work to be done to improve this article, but I think this will serve as the "bones" for future expansion. For what it's worth, I believe two new sections should be added (after the "History" section): "Campus" and "Organization and administration," which could, like "History," cover the entire institution without confusing readers.

I invite input and discussion here.

-- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 18:23, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Reply 8-Feb-2020

The reshuffle of items to more easily-perused sections is definately do-able - you're correct that the article would become more readable if the layout was more organic. Another issue affecting the article is the state of its references. In a count of them taken from the proposed draft, 19 of the 34 references — 55% — are from the organization itself, a disproportionate amount. Changes to the structure of the article carry it only so far — the content needs to come from more than a single source. To prevent the article from becoming an extension of the school's website, it needs additional WP:SECONDARY sources. I believe the addition of these should precede any restructuring effort, or at least occur concomitant to it. Regards,  Spintendo  18:54, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

@Spintendo: Thank you, as always. You do a lot of thankless work reviewing edit requests from COI editors like me.

Here's my thinking. It will be difficult to improve the ratio in favor of secondary sources without significant rewrites, and significant rewrites will be difficult without having a structure that works. That's especially true when I'm trying to make the changes via edit requests that are succinct and respect other editors' time. So, I thought that a restructuring could come first and would be much less controversial if was only a restructuring of what's already here rather than a restructuring bundled together with significant rewrites. Then, I could propose rewrites within specific sections – rewrites that would include more and better secondary sources.

With all that said, I want to work with you and other editors in the way that you prefer. I'm happy to prepare an edit request to add secondary sources to the article in its present form.

-- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 20:09, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Exciting

Using the be bold principle- go for it. You have done a lot of research and even if we eventually decide otherwise, it will give a fresh window on the world which will be a valid experiment. As I see it there are three articles here- the foundation, and the schools project and the grad school project. We have some similar cross boundary structures in the UK, and as yet no universal solution. The sections you find in WP:SCH/AG seem to work for individual schools, and I assume WP:UNI are happy with their sections- So I would look to concatenating 3 infoboxes, one for the organisation, one for the grad school and Infobox school- with the repeat sections and the irrelevant ones ommitted. Perhaps you could work up your suggestion as a subpage of your user page, and when its ready I can transfer it over. ClemRutter (talk) 19:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

@ClemRutter: Thank you. I do want to make sure I'm making it clear that I have a (disclosed) conflict of interest in this case and thus am relying on other editors to review my proposals for neutrality.

Your suggestion on a concatenated infobox is a great idea and one I had not considered; I look forward to taking a crack at it.

As for creating a new version in my userspace for another editor to copy over, my understanding of Spintendo's polite reply above indicated that I can't do that sort of thing because it would be a violation of WP:PARAPHRASE. (I would be proposing a version of the article filled with words that I couldn't take credit for having written.) In replying to you now, I do not want to give the impression that I am admin shopping.

With that said, there are two versions in my userspace which I would very much welcome you reviewing and considering for transferring over. The first is one I originally proposed, which includes some rewrites, additional sections, and a number of new sources cited: User:Danielklotz/Bank_Street_College_of_Education. That's the one @Spintendo rejected when I submitted it as an edit request above. The second is one I just now created, User:Danielklotz/Bank_Street_College_of_Education_(restructure_only), which is only the restructuring/shuffling around that I proposed here in this thread (no rewrites, no new citations). If you are willing to transfer that over, just note that I've commented out the logos and the categories in my userspace draft, so they'll need to be uncommented when you transfer them. I really believe that once we have a new article structure, we can begin making significant improvements to the article. Thank you again for weighing in.

-- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 20:07, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Sidney Stringer Academy is an example of a school that used to be an ISCED#4 FE college, sportcentre and a ISCED#2 ISCED#3 secondary school that has now extended to ISCED#1-- and the Abraham Moss Community School that used to include a ISCED#4 FE college- Theatre and Library. The moss may give you some ideas about content. I'll have a hack at subpage restructured in the next couple of days ClemRutter (talk) 23:06, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

@ClemRutter: Thank you very much. Also, I apologize to you and to Spintendo that I didn't see this reply from you before I added my two new proposed updates below. Justlettersandnumbers came through the article last night and made extensive changes to the article without engaging in this discussion on the talk page. Those changes seem mostly warranted, so I assumed my drafts were rendered irrelevant by them. I wouldn't have made the two additional edit requests below if I had seen your response. I appreciate your involvement and will give you as much time as you need to work up a restructured version. Thank you. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 22:23, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Sources for History section

The History section of this article about an educational institution in New York is, appropriately, flagged with {{Unreferenced section}}. As I have a COI, I would like to suggest sources for a neutral editor to review and, if approved, add to that section.

• Book review of a biography of the founder of Bank Street College of Education, Lucy Sprague Mitchell, from the New York Times in 1987. It establishes that she was the founder. Example citation (for easy copy and pasting):
  • <ref name="NYT 1987">{{cite web |last1=Chesler |first1=Ellen |title=She Wanted It All, and Got It |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/22/books/she-wanted-it-all-and-got-it.html |website=New York Times |accessdate=February 9, 2020 |date=March 22, 1987}}</ref>
• The entry on Bank Street College of Education from Encyclopedia Britannica. It establishes that it was originally named the Bureau of Educational Experiments, that the founding date was 1916, that the founder was Lucy Sprague Mitchell, that she was influenced by the works of John Dewey. Example citation:
  • <ref name="Britannica">{{cite web |title=Bank Street College of Education |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bank-Street-College-of-Education |website=Encyclopaedia Britannica |accessdate=February 9, 2020}}</ref>
• A profile of the founder that originally ran in the April 2001 edition of Early Childhood Today (a periodical publication of Scholastic Inc.) and is now available online. It establishes that she studied the works of John Dewey, that she founded the Bureau of Educational Experiences, that the name later changed to Bank Street College. Example citation:
  • <ref name="Scholastic Mitchell profile">{{cite web |title=Pioneers In Our Field: Lucy Sprague Mitchell - Teaching the Whole Child |url=https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/pioneers-our-field-lucy-sprague-mitchell-teaching-whole-child/ |publisher=Scholastic Inc. |accessdate=February 9, 2020}}</ref>

Thank you.

-- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 14:28, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Bank Street as the initial model for the Head Start program

This is an article about an educational institution in New York City which operates a Head Start program. I propose the addition of a sentence to the Head Start subsection of this article.

The independent, secondary reference work Early Childhood Education: An International Encyclopedia, speaking of the Bank Street School for Children, states (on page 517), "The laboratory school was an initial model for the 1965 Head Start Program." That fact helps establish why the Wikipedia article about Bank Street College of Education should include a Head Start section at all, showing why it is a noteworthy aspect of the institution and calibrating the due weight the topic should receive within the article.

Based on that, I suggest adding this sentence, with citation:

When it began in 1965, the national Head Start program was modeled on the Bank Street School for Children.<ref name="Early Childhood Education encyclopedia">{{cite book |editor1-last=New |editor1-first=Rebecca S. |editor2-last=Cochran |editor2-first=Moncrieff |title=Early Childhood Education: An International Encyclopedia, Volume 2 |date=2007 |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |page=517 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FP3Uot24bggC&pg=PA517}}</ref>

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielklotz (talk • contribs) 14:53, 9 February 2020 (UTC)