Poor children and the poorest children: Have we failed to grasp the differences?

Does House Bill 338 label schools failing while ignoring the factors that undermine learning, especially poverty? (AJC File)

Educators have long understood poverty influences whether a student succeeds. What they are discovering is persistent poverty has an even greater influence.

Typically, we’ve looked at free and reduced lunch rates in public schools and compared systems with similar numbers of children getting subsidized lunches. The FRL rates became the proxy for poverty. And we’ve dutifully pointed out when districts, including Atlanta Public Schools, lagged districts with comparable FRL rates.

But those FRL rates only told us how many students met the qualifying threshold. The rates did not reveal the depth or duration of the student’s poverty.

So, while Atlanta underperformed, was the poverty in APS schools deeper and more persistent? (We will hopefully be able to better discern poverty levels now that there’s a move away from relying on imprecise FRL rates.)

Over the last few years, policy discussions about poverty in schools have become more nuanced. Is the poverty multi-generational? Are the children coming from homes with low-income or no income? Is the poverty reflective of temporary setbacks? Or, has it been the child’s lifelong condition?

We need to start acknowledging that the systems educating the poorest of the poor face greater challenges.

Atlanta Public Schools Superintendent Meria Carstarphen noted her lowest-performing schools educate children from homes with intergenerational poverty where no one in the household has acquired the life skills necessary to thrive. She cited a mother who told her after a presentation that she didn’t comprehend anything being said about her child or the school–  the handouts, the PowerPoint or Carstarphen’s comments.

Carstarphen realized APS was not communicating well with such parents, saying, “There are generations of adults who have children in our schools, and they don’t know what we are doing. They try to show up. They raise their hands. The fact is people can’t communicate; they do not have the physical words in their mouths because the brain can’t create them. Generations of families don’t even have the vocabulary to explain what they are concerned about, much less read my overly wordy PowerPoint slides.”

Research shows the achievement gap widens when you zoom in on persistently disadvantaged kids. Susan Dynarski, a professor of education, public policy and economics at the University of Michigan, wrote this week in The New York Times about her study:

In Michigan, as in the rest of the country, about half of eighth graders in public schools receive a free or reduced-price lunch. But when we look more closely, we see that just 14 percent have been eligible for subsidized meals every year since kindergarten. These children are the poorest of the poor — the persistently disadvantaged.

The math scores of these poorest children are far lower than predicted by the standard measure of economic disadvantage. The achievement gap between persistently disadvantaged children and those who were never disadvantaged is about a third larger than the gap that is typically measured.

The actual study by Dynarksi and Katherine Michelmore of the University of Michigan concludes:

Incorporating information on lifetime disadvantage allows for distinguishing between students who are transitorily poor from those who are persistently poor and this has implications for the income-based achievement gap. While the level differences in test score gaps between using lifetime poverty and contemporaneous poverty are substantially attenuated once controlling for student and school characteristics, the math test score gap between the persistently poor and the never poor remains nearly 40 percent larger than that measured using contemporaneous poverty alone. Demographic and school characteristics alone cannot explain the differences in test scores between those who are poor in any given year and those who are persistently poor throughout grade school.

Efforts to close income-based gaps in achievement should focus on the subset of low-income students that are persistently poor. These students tend to become eligible for subsidized school meals early in childhood, often by the time they enter 1st grade, and are likely to remain eligible throughout grade school. Those who first become poor by the time they enter kindergarten are least likely to escape poverty compared to their counterparts who become poor in later grades. They likely face a whole host of other issues such as unstable housing, family instability, and parental job loss. They also score significantly lower on standardized tests than both their counterparts who were never poor as well as their peers who were transitorily poor throughout grade school. Previous research linking test scores to adult outcomes suggests that these children are also less likely to attend college and earn lower wages in adulthood (Chetty et al 2011), which could have important implications for the intergenerational transmission of poverty and income inequality for years to come.

 

Reader Comments 0

78 comments
FatBoySlimATL
FatBoySlimATL

Many people here have a “2-D” observation of the reality of the US. The stance that ignorant single-mothers are the root of all the American educational tribulations is childish, putting it nicely. Education administrators’ constant flip-flop on educational theory implementations doesn’t come without consequence.


We are not too far removed from a time when an education wasn’t a right for many people, especially in the South. A free education was only a right under Georgia law beginning with the ratification of the 1982 Georgia Constitution.

Once basic reading and writing skills were acquired, a day in the life of a school-aged kid in the “historic” South consisted of making a living any way you could. My 78-year-old grandfather has only a 7th grade 1940-50’s “Burke County GA, African-American” education. Instead of finishing school, he had to work in order to support himself and his family, which consisted of a couple of younger half-brothers, his mother and a senile uncle. In the mid-20th century you’d be hard-pressed to find a Southern Black family with all members intact… So, for me at least, it’s not too difficult to believe that some of these older parents/grandparents have a tough time comprehending a syllabus or following PowerPoint presentation.


The issue of American poverty is a systemic one that has nagged the US Government for years. Only after President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty in his 1964 State of the Union speech did “mainstream” Americans get a basic understanding of the concerns facing the impoverished masses. More than fifty years later, we are still no closer to finding a solution to poverty. Welfare programs offer a life-line, but not self-sustainability which must be paramount. I’m not a professional when it comes to this stuff, but in my experience, when people know better, they do better. There is the starting point.


Quick question. Are the proponents of eugenics conservatives or liberals? Just curious.  


newsphile
newsphile

Some parents in poverty who don't survive without the government assistance want a better life for their children. They work hard to ensure a better life for their descendants.  They are the ones who need our help. 

Having worked in social service for many years, I can attest that the real problem is the large number of families who have been in poverty for years and who work the system to feed their drug habit or other binge.  We see many mothers who spend days going from charity to charity to get everything anyone will give to them.  They take the merchandise to the streets, sell it for a price, and don't spend the money on their families.  The mothers (and fathers, when one is in the picture) stay out all night, leaving unattended children.  They teach the daughters to have a baby every year or two because the checks increase per child.  They spend almost none of their checks on the children. This is the face of much of the multi-generational poverty in GA.  The numbers of "stay at home" parents in poverty are increasing, but they are not at home with the children.  This type of behavior is what must be remedied if we save the children.

Lee_CPA2
Lee_CPA2

Poverty is merely a function of low IQ.  Let's face it, if you have an IQ of 80, on welfare, and living in the projects, most likely, your mate will be another low IQ welfare recipient.  Your offspring will likewise be low IQ and the cycle continues.


Mandatory birth control for welfare recipients will do more to fix this issue than all the hand-wringing by educrats and politicians.  Side benefit, it will also reduce the crime rate.


But no, it is their "right" for dullards to breed like rabbits.  Pony up taxpayers, LaQueesha's carrying low.

ShericaFreeman
ShericaFreeman

Wow....well said. The LaQuisha part reeks of racism tho because there are more whites on welfare than blacks...since you didn't know. Blacks are only 13 % of the is population...and uhhhh rural whites have the largest share of welfare...keep it real. But I agree with you that breeding din poverty is not the answer

CSpinks
CSpinks

What "efforts to close income-based gaps in achievement" are being made by your local board of education? Good question.


But a better question: How has your local board of education closed such achievement gaps?


If the answer to this "better question" is that your local BOE hasn't closed such gaps, I must proffer a cousin's advice to his son upon the latter's encountering a difficult problem upon assumption of a most responsible position in local public service: "Son, if you can't get the job done, we need to get somebody down there who can."

AvgGeorgian
AvgGeorgian

It can be a matter of perspective. 


Some of you with a certain attitude about the failure of the impoverished to do the things you have done through hard work and perseverance (and often a head start - chill out - often,not always), can be seen in the same light by your educational, financial, and social betters. 


They look at your life and see someone stuck in middle class squalor through lack of more and better education, harder and smarter work, lack of financial wherewithal, and having children before you could afford to prepare a proper home for them. Billionaires look down on millionaires.

class80olddog
class80olddog

According to government statistics, around 10% of families have children under 18 and no income.  Subtract the unemployed with children under 18 and you still have a sizeable number living completely on the government dole.

CardiganBoy
CardiganBoy

 Atlanta Public Schools Superintendent Meria Carstarphen noted her lowest-performing schools educate children from homes with intergenerational poverty where no one in the household has acquired the life skills necessary to thrive. She cited a mother who told her after a presentation that she didn’t comprehend anything being said about her child or the school–  the handouts, the PowerPoint or Carstarphen’s comments.


If you ask me, the above paragraph should break your heart, then make you mad.  


We allow our leadership to divide us along political/ethnic lines. Biased media profits by exacerbating these divisions through dishonest reportage and provides a forum for irresponsible punditry that can best be described as little more than partisan propaganda.


And Director Carstarphen finally ventures beyond platitude and pep talks to identify intergenerational poverty as the root cause of APS' lowest performing students.


If "intergenerational" is the PC-approved way of talking about illegitimacy (AKA babies having babies) then bully for Superintendent Carstarphen.


If we can all finally agree on what the problem is, how long will it take us to effectively address it?


I won't hold my breff.  Let the name-calling commence (as usual).

xxxzzz
xxxzzz

Makes you wonder if Carstaphen is blaming the parent for her own inability to communicate.  I haven't heard Carstaphen speak for any length, but it is really common for these administrators to speak with lots of jargon and acronyms that aren't understood by anyone not spending a lot of time reading about the issue.

EdJohnson
EdJohnson

@xxxzzz This a short version of my earlier longer post today that apparently got blocked...


So when people who supposedly “can’t communicate” nonetheless ask Carstarphen, “Why are you doing this?” and Carstarphen can only offer spin about “taking bold action” and “having a short runway” and “saving APS from being taken over by Gov. Deal’s Opportunity School District,” yet the people who supposedly “can’t communicate” clearly understand the spin has nothing to do with improving their neighborhood public schools nor their children’s education, then, of course, “bewilderment” is a perfectly reasonable response.

For example, the incessantly repetitious spin Carstarphen spoke in response to a community member having asked her to explain herself so bewildered and angered and frustrated the community member that he walked out of the meeting leaving Carstarphen to spout on.

class80olddog
class80olddog

"More will have to work to keep food stamps"  an AJC article - but no work requirement for those with kids.

Corey
Corey

Georgia No. 5 worst state for underprivileged children

No one wants to live in poverty and any parent will tell you they certainly don’t want their child living in poverty.

But unfortunately for Georgia residents a new report from the personal finance website WalletHub, the Peach state is the No. 5 worst state for underprivileged children. WalletHub reported it analysts compared the 50 states and the District of Columbia based on the pervasiveness of certain “disadvantage” indicators. It’s data set of 16 key metrics ranging from “infant-mortality rate” to “child food-insecurity rate” to “percentage of maltreated children.”

 

class80olddog
class80olddog

@Corey "any parent will tell you they certainly don’t want their child living in poverty"  and yet they continue to have children that they know will be doomed to poverty. Or did you mean "no parent wants their child living in poverty - they want them to be given money".

class80olddog
class80olddog

This reminds me of a story I heard.  A man lost his job and he and his wife moved in with her parents and depended upon them to support them.  The husband refused to allow his wife to work (against his religion) and would not take lesser jobs to help out.  While living there, the wife becomes pregnant.  The parents are enraged and throws them out of the house for bringing a baby into the picture when they are not even supporting themselves.  They refused to enable bad behavior.  Once thrown out, then they HAD to fend for themselves and quickly the wife got a job.  Imagine if this scenario was transplanted into the welfare system!

sneakpeakintoeducation
sneakpeakintoeducation

@class80olddog


Wow, what a story and you tell it with pride. I have a similar story. It was a friend's brother who was a hater of anyone who was a taker, a leech, a moocher. Anyone who had their handout taking the money that he had worked hard for was scum and the lowest of the low. Then he had a devastating stroke that rendered him unfit to work. He ended up getting disability, was on medicaid and his kids got free school lunches. I am happy that he had the services to support him at his time of need. 

Gene G Johnson
Gene G Johnson

Wascatlady,
We don't need a "reputable study" on multigenerational poverty to understand what is obvious.
Children cost money.
If you don't have any, you shouldn't have children.
The woman in your story is an all too familiar one.
She can't read but she quit school and got pregnant and had four kids.
She complains she cannot pass the driver's test because she cannot read. If she cannot read, she isn't qualified to get a job. No job, no money. No money, no car. I am certain she understands that.
Schools need to teach the obvious and quit being cowardly. Schools spend an inordinate amount of time drilling kids about recycling and anti-smoking. Schools, especially schools with multi-generational poverty students, need to admit the cause of the problem and educate the kids -- it is not OK to give birth to children you cannot afford. It is not OK to have babies when you are a child yourself.
Drill it into their heads just as the schools drilled the kids about duck and cover.
And as for the uneducated mother of four -- mandatory birth control and mandatory work.
FDR put work projects in place. Work is good for everyone. If your mother of four wants money she can do menial labor. There are plenty of jobs that don't require one to read -- mopping floors inside the school for starters, emptying the trash, raking leaves. It will give her something more meaningful and important to do than nothing at all.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@Gene G Johnson What enables her (and all those like her) is the current setup of our welfare system.  There should not be such a thing as a no-income family (they should be starving to death).  As you said, make work available, if the mother chooses not to work, take her kids away and let her starve to death.  Very few would ever get to that point.

longhairedhippytypepinko
longhairedhippytypepinko

@class80olddog @Gene G Johnson How do you feel about the medicare mooches who refuse to lose weight, stop drinking, stop smoking or make any reasonable attempt to lower the taxpayer burden?  How about Peepaw who dumps $50,000 a year in the slot machine, but refuses to pay a penny for his 1st, 2nd, or 3rd long term hospitalization for liver failure, diabetes and other complications of fat arse and alcoholism?  The taxpayer could raise a child from birth through college for the same money it costs to get him up and back to the casino.  What about Meemaw with her COPD, oxygen tank and cigarettes, running up those bills and risking the lives of everyone around her? (not to mention 35 years of dropping hazardous waste everywhere she goes, cigarette butts) Should be let them die? Seize their property to pay for medical? Take their pension, social security? Force their children to work an extra job or we take their parents away to the death farm?

Wascatlady
Wascatlady

I'd like to see a reputable study done on multigenerational poverty--people with kids now whose parents were on welfare,whose parents before them were on welfare. Could this be tracked with the FRPL data we have?


I think about the kids I taught most recently before I retired 2 years ago.  I had meetings with their parents or guardians, and what struck me was how many of the kids had no parent (just a grandparent or aunt) due to drugs/jail, and the guardian had limited education.  Or, like the story cited, I spoke at length with a mama about her son, a nice kid with no drive but the ability to do schoolwork.  She had not shown up several times for the meeting(times and days set by her), and told us she had no car and was living with her parents. She had become pregnant at 14 and quit school, and now had 4 children with 3 men at the age of 24.  She was never "good at school."  She was unable to get a license because she could not pass the reading part of the test.  What can be done for her? Her kids are being raised largely by the parents that failed her.  Are they doomed as well?


Around here, in this the year 2016, we are still having kids graduate from high school as THE FIRST MEMBER OF THEIR FAMILY TO DO SO!


When I worked in adult literacy, it was not uncommon to have 30 year old grandmothers.  What is the (legal) solution?  That's the rub, isn't it?  We all have these great ideas, but they trample our American beliefs and laws.


To better understand the phenomena of unprepared family formation, I suggest reading, "Promises I can Keep."  

class80olddog
class80olddog

@Wascatlady "Around here, in this the year 2016, we are still having kids graduate from high school as THE FIRST MEMBER OF THEIR FAMILY TO DO SO!"  But it is not because they have not been given the opportunity - they have just  CHOSEN not to take advantage of the opportunity.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@Wascatlady So what would happen if we did not give people any welfare?  No food stamps.  No WIC?  No EITC?  Would girls still become pregnant if they knew it would make their daily struggle just to procure food that much harder?  What if the only thing we gave out free was birth control?  What if we actually imprisoned people for their criminal actions?  Food for thought.

trifecta_
trifecta_

@Wascatlady 

Speaking of liberals, let me make their day by suggesting we incentivize the underclass to remove themselves from the gene pool: Offer $3,000 gift cards to any female aged 20-24 willing to get her tubes snipped.

Or perhaps only those on welfare who already have a child.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@trifecta_ @Wascatlady Eugenics! Racial genocide! Non-PC!  You are going against the right of every woman to have as many kids as she wants and have you and I support them financially!

Jay5125
Jay5125

@class80olddog @Wascatlady yes.  Crime would increase and orphanages would increase.  Abandoning kids at hospitals etc would also rise. Also, not just girls are getting pregnant they do need a partner to do this act.  Can't let the guys off the hook.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@Jay5125 @class80olddog @Wascatlady "Also, not just girls are getting pregnant they do need a partner to do this act.  Can't let the guys off the hook."  I agree 100%.  Before any welfare benefits can be received, the mother must name the father and it be confirmed by paternity test.  After that the father becomes responsible for half the amount of upkeep for the child.  If he does not pay - send him to jail.  And when crime increases, build more prisons.  More prisons will eventually reduce the number of prisoners.

trifecta_
trifecta_

@class80olddog 

Many if not most black parents understand their community's true problems and aren't fooled by liberal rhetoric.

May they one day soon wrestle the media microphones away from race-hustlers.

class80olddog
class80olddog

The only way to save some of these children would be to remove them from their mother at birth - and for some that would be too late - they are already brain-damaged from the mother's use of drugs and alcohol during pregnancy.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@Wascatlady @class80olddog If you were to consider this as a reality - there would have to be a reason to take the child away - such as criminal behavior such as using drugs during pregnancy.  The child would then have to be put up for adoption or placed in an orphanage.  A better solution would have been to prevent an obviously unwanted child from being conceived in the first place. 

class80olddog
class80olddog

@xxxzzz @class80olddog @Wascatlady So foster homes is the most effective way of assuring that all of these children have a place to live, adequate food, and an organized routine?  There are plenty of foster families at no more than they would spend on an orphanage? PC, PC, PC!

trifecta_
trifecta_

Children from poor families can learn. 

But liberals promote the myth they cannotso as to give cover to failed welfare programs and a political party (the Democrats) using income redistribution to buy votes.

Meanwhile, you won't hear liberals discuss the single biggest bar to educational success: single-parent households.

Nearly 3 out of 4 black children now grow up without a father in the home.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@trifecta_ Also, the greatest predictor of future poverty is having a child out of wedlock in your teens.

RollDawg
RollDawg

Trifecta, much of what you state is absolutely 100% accurate, but conservatives also hide behind the constant bashing of "liberal this, liberal that" which gives you cover to do nothing but continue pointing fingers instead of getting your fingers dirty and actually doing something.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@RollDawg If you notice, I mentioned several solutions below.  However, it is like my suggestions for improving schools by increasing discipline, enforcing attendance, and doing away with social promotion: it does not fit the current PC agenda, so it will never be implemented.  Just look at the tremendous fight over requiring people on welfare to submit to drug tests.

trifecta_
trifecta_

@RollDawg 

Acknowledging the devastation wrought when women without husbands choose to have children, or fathers abandon their kids, would be a start.

But campaigning against racism is a liberal media obsession. Discussions about the real problems of the inner city simply aren't tolerated.

RollDawg
RollDawg

Trifecta, So what ere YOU going to do to help? Pointing out the obvious, which we've know for decades, is not a solution.

ErnestB
ErnestB

@trifecta_


I merely want to clarify an often misquoted statistic.  72% of black children are born to unwed mothers.  About 55% grow up in a household headed by their mother.  Even the 55% do have many active fathers though not married to the mother.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@ErnestB @trifecta_ Does "active" mean they contribute money to the upkeep of the child?  Or do they siphon money from the mother? One advantage of the "nuclear" family is that it is one household - don't have to rent two places. 

ErnestB
ErnestB

@class80olddog @ErnestB @trifecta_


Yes, active does mean they contribute to the upkeep of the child.  I know several unmarried couples that have children together.  Some live together while some do not.  They do what is best for the child(ren).  I bet you know of some also.  I recognize there are too many households headed by a woman where the father is not involved.


Unfortunately marriage does not have the same meaning it once did.

class80olddog
class80olddog

"No Income homes" - how can you live on "no income"?  Oh, that's right, you depend on someone else GIVING you money so that you can live.  These women can't read the "overly wordy" Powerpoints?  They have zero skills for anything that would generate an income except for "making babies".  You cannot solve poverty by giving money to someone.  You cannot solve overpopulation by feeding the masses.  Try an experiment with rabbits in a pen - to keep them from starving, just feed them.  You will shortly find that this is not a solution, that the entire production of food on earth will not feed your rabbit population.  The more you GIVE people money, they more they are TIED to the poverty.  The only way to break the cycle of poverty is to only give people the OPPORTUNITY to make money.  They cannot get welfare or food stamps unless they go to school and make acceptable grades.  They cannot receive food stamps and other handouts if they test positive for drugs (if they have money to spend on drugs, they don't need handouts).  If they want welfare, they have to agree to passive birth control.  Go to the source of the problem and quit trying to say that it is the schools' responsibility.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@Wascatlady @class80olddog Which brings me back to the point about their only "marketable skill".  Where do you think some of these kids come from?  Of course, if they are imprisoned for drug use and the prison is run correctly, there is no possibility of pregnancy.  If you make assistance dependent upon them accepting Norplant or other passive birth control, it gives them much incentive to choose the path of no more kids.  If you release women from prison early on parole or probation, the same birth control measure should be implemented.  And for males, enforced child support until the child is 18.  Maybe that would make some keep it in their pants.  And enforced prison sentences would keep them from impregnating women for a while.

Gene G Johnson
Gene G Johnson

The label of "good school" in Atlanta is a myth. There are no "schools" that are better or worse. They are all taught by teachers who get their degrees from the same colleges and those teachers teach the same subjects using the same common curriculum.
However, schools in Atlanta vary greatly in how the students perform because of one thing only -- the difference in the parents.
Schools with children who perform at much higher levels are children with parents who are educated and who delayed childbirth until they became educated and gainfully employed in jobs that paid a salary or wage large enough to live decently.
I've heard Carstarphen speak. She mentions talking to a fifty year- old woman who was already a great-grandmother.
Those of us who have at least a basic education can do the math and determine that that woman and her children and grandchildren -- all  of them -- became pregnant and had children when they were just teenagers.
Teenagers aren't old enough nor mature enough to have children and when they do, poverty is all but guaranteed.
Carstarphen often mentions her race and her upbringing in what she describes as a racist city in a racist time; yet. she succeeded  and is well-educated and she is among countless other black women who are very well-educated and successful.
What Carstarphen refuses to acknowledge is that there is a cause for multi-generational poverty - when a teenager decides to have sexual relations and not use protection, she and her partner will become pregnant and they will not have enough money to financially support that child.
And when that child does the same, multi-generational poverty is all but guaranteed.
There is one core subject missing from Atlanta's public schools and that lesson is a simple economic one:
Children cost money.
Don't choose to have children until you can afford them and "afford them" doesn't mean depend on someone else to pay for them.
Delay childbirth until one is educated and has a job with benefits and income enough to sustain a life for the parent and child.
That simple economic lesson is taboo in Atlanta Public Schools.
Until Carstarphen and her board of education are willing to acknowledge the real consequences and causes of poverty, most of Atlanta's children will continue to  severely underperform academically and will continue to live in poverty. There is no amount of money one can throw at the problem to fix it.
This lesson, the mantra, must begin early just as the anti-smoking campaign.
Delay childbirth until you are educated and are gainfully employed in a position that pays enough to financially sustain a decent living.


Infraredguy
Infraredguy

@Gene G Johnson There are many fingers to point and many ways to point them BUT the bottom line is that Liberal Government policies over the last 50 years while well intended have for the most part produced negative results in reducing poverty. IF allowing all sorts of free aid to flow without expecting accountability from the recipients proves not to work, stop doing it. I review cases for the Judges in the Juvenile Court of my County of child deprivation that has resulted in kids being taken from homes and parents by DFCS and while most have a illegal drug component most show a cycle of Government dependency, there has developed a class of people that use and abuse the system to produce income. I see young people ( 18 to 40 ) that are on food stamps and think nothing about it and whose main objective is how they can get on SSI and section 8, all this while still producing babies with no regard to the consequences that the kids will follow in their footsteps. It's a sad never ending story that simply throwing more money at will not solve. When the family unit is destroyed, in most cases the lives are destroyed

jezel
jezel

Better schools ? How about better communities and jobs that pay a livable wage.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@jezel There are lots of jobs that pay a liveable wage, but they require people with minimum skills (like getting up in the morning).  I am astounded by the number of applicants for jobs that are turned away due to failing a drug test. You make your own community - and a lot of these people have the community that THEY made.

dcdcdc
dcdcdc

The public school policy of forcing kids to stay in their "assigned" school destins poor kids to stay poor - since schools in poor areas are almost always the worst ones.  


But we can't allow kids and parents to choose their schools.  Absolutely not!!   Even if it would allow the parents who actually care to pull their kids out and give them a fighting chance.


Sad...but there is zero chance of allowing this, as long as the true priority of the eduacracy is the adults running the central office - and not the students.

Starik
Starik

@kaelyn The awesome schools decline until the awesome schools become mediocre, then a bad school. 

kaelyn
kaelyn

@dcdcdc

School choice sounds like a great idea, but how does it actually work? I realize that the dollars are supposed to follow the student to their school of choice, but what happens when everyone wants to get into the same few great schools? If school choice were available tomorrow, I'm bailing from our local high school. I'm guessing quite a few other parents are, too. When we ALL show up at that awesome school across town, then what?

gapeach101
gapeach101

@dcdcdc

The article above talks about how parents can't even understand a power point presentation, but you expect them to find a better school and transport their children on a daily basis to this better school.  Really?

Astropig
Astropig

@gapeach101 @dcdcdc


" parents can't even understand a power point presentation, but you expect them to find a better school and transport their children on a daily basis to this better school.  Really?"


Let me see if I have this right:


You'd trust this theoretical family to decide whether they should allow this theoretical child to be born or terminated,but you wouldn't trust them with the decision of where he/she could go to school? Really?

Astropig
Astropig

@dcdcdc


Spot on. The eduacracy and the anti-choice mob can't allow parents to freely choose their kids school because:


1) That child might end up in the chair right next to the elite's child,thus providing unwelcome competition for seats in good schools.


2) That family might finally escape multigenerational poverty and turn their back on the plantation masters that have keep them poor,uneducated and dependent.


Keep telling these people the truth Dcdcdc-Tell it loud and often.They need to hear it.

Wascatlady
Wascatlady

@dcdcdc So, if you think poor kids need to choose their own schools, perhaps we should allow all kids on FARPL to choose their schools, and all those better off can stay in their assigned schools?  Of course, that may mean  that those in the assigned schools find their schools changing when the poor kids show up. That would be unfair, right?  So, if all kids can choose their school, are you counting on the poor kids not being able to go to the schools of more wealth because their parents cannot get them there, so the only ones who can "move up" are those of wealthier parents?

dcdcdc
dcdcdc

@kaelyn It works this way.  Those parents/kids who actually care about bettering themselves go through the effort to move to better schools.  And over the course of a couple of generations, a significant number of kids go from "no hope" to "I live a much better life than my mom was forced to".


And the eduacracy gets out of the way, and stops forcing these same kids to stay stuck in the hexx-holes that they are currently forced to attend, since their mom can't afford a more expensive house/apt.  


3 guesses which one of the two of those will be harder to get done.....

dcdcdc
dcdcdc

@Wascatlady @dcdcdc No, we are counting on the only kids actually moving being ones who want (or have moms who want) to learn.  


Not hard.  


The hard part is getting the eduacracy out of the way, since this doesn't help the "adults in the central office", who are after all the real priority in public education.

Nate TheDaddy
Nate TheDaddy

@Astropig @gapeach101 @dcdcdc - Test the kid, many times especially if caught while young those kids can beat the odds.  If they test good, don't hold them back because of their parents, that kid may break the family cycle.  

Nate TheDaddy
Nate TheDaddy

@dcdcdc @kaelyn - School counselors are going to have to earn their money sometimes.  Too many kids who come from bad circumstances are left behind.  Think of all the brainpower this country has lost over the years because a bright kid didn't get the opportunity.  



Wascatlady
Wascatlady

@dcdcdc @Wascatlady I share some of your disgust about the bloated, self-important CO staff. However, how do very poor people move?  Have you ever been around any very poor people?  Things that seem simple and obvious to you and me are not always so obvious to others.

dcdcdc
dcdcdc

@Wascatlady @dcdcdc I work with them personally and intimately to help them better their lives, two days a week at our local food/clothes bank.  I deal with trying to help them with every aspect of their life, and constantly see how their kids are stuck in hexx-holes due simply to the mom not being able to afford a better apt (and living with the constant threat of eviction).


There will be no "getting out" for most of them until this issue is resolved.  But continuing to make them dependent on govt assistance is the worst possible approach.  And that is all we have now - since getting them into a better future has been stymied by the eduacracy.

kaelyn
kaelyn

@dcdcdc

Ok, but I'm talking about supply vs. demand. Our mediocre neighborhood school has hundred of kids who don't live in the attendance zone. We are now bursting at the seams with kids who want to be in a better school than the one they just left. We already have not so great schools with low enrollment because parents are lying on affidavits stating that they live in the district.

Once the doors are open to everyone to go where they please, there cannot be enough room for all of the people wanting in. I'm certainly not anti choice, I just don't see how the "better" schools would be able to accommodate the students.

class80olddog
class80olddog

@xxxzzz @gapeach101 @dcdcdc I once tried to do a training class in Spanish with Spanish handouts - until I found out the people I was training were illiterate in their own language!  Teach them English?  They were not even taught Spanish!

class80olddog
class80olddog

@kaelyn If better charter schools were allowed to open and receive these students (and the funding that goes with them), you would see a lot of moms who care sending their kids to the charter school.  And the traditional school would be left with the dregs - the students who don't care because their parent does not care.

dcdcdc
dcdcdc

@kaelyn Kaelyn - it's all about money - or more specifically, who controls it.  And the eduacracy will fight tooth and nail to keep control over it.