Reading this Buffalo News story about the link between improving schools and the struggling neighborhoods that surround them got me wondering (especially in light of all the recent discussions over the outside influences in education):

Which is a more desirable situation, one where schools improve first and then prod the surrounding neighborhood to get its act together, or one where the neighborhood improves first and its residents demand that the school gets it act together?

Or doesn't it matter?

The NY Times coverage of the first day of classes in NYC, for example, included this interesting sentence: After posing, Mr. Bloomberg urged reporters to look at P.S. 8’s test results. The scores have risen steeply in recent years as residents of the increasingly wealthy neighborhood showed renewed interest in the school.

UPDATE: Edwize's Peter Goodman also found that line in the story peculiar, and suggests Mayor Bloomberg has made it his goal to improve neighborhoods first, a la reform by gentrification. I don't think that's entirely right. Middle class parents in NYC get orgasmic about having gifted and talented programs that tend to shut out the grubbies of the city, and this administration hasn't pandered in that direction. In fact, the whole NEST saga last spring pretty much proved the "pander to yuppies and hope for the best" agenda doesn't exist in NYC right now. But that's just my opinion.