The comments here went down that rabbit hole. Here I will try to summarize some of it.
Summary:
Due to "many past events", our current policies and societal issues, the USA has many people who struggle to lead successful, rewarding and financially stable lives. Measures of the issue include:
Now I know that many of you want to obsess about Blacks, Racism, etc, but that is NOT a measurable issue. And we have tons of Native Americans, Hispanics, and even White families that suffer in very similar ways.
And after looking into the numbers, the unfortunate reality is that it is likely that most of the additional police encounters with Black and Hispanic individuals is due to the higher likelihood of them being in gangs and involved in crime. And yes there is a war going on between the gangs, other gangs and the police, and yes sometimes innocent civilians pay the price. So cut the police a break, while making sure the bad officers are punished.
In summary, Jerry, Moose and I got no where...
Summary:
Due to "many past events", our current policies and societal issues, the USA has many people who struggle to lead successful, rewarding and financially stable lives. Measures of the issue include:
- Many households living in poverty or near poverty
- Millions of children neglected or abused each year
- Large % of single parent households in some groups
- Large % of children not academically proficient in some groups
- Large % of gang / crime within some groups
- Low income households having more babies
Now I know that many of you want to obsess about Blacks, Racism, etc, but that is NOT a measurable issue. And we have tons of Native Americans, Hispanics, and even White families that suffer in very similar ways.
And after looking into the numbers, the unfortunate reality is that it is likely that most of the additional police encounters with Black and Hispanic individuals is due to the higher likelihood of them being in gangs and involved in crime. And yes there is a war going on between the gangs, other gangs and the police, and yes sometimes innocent civilians pay the price. So cut the police a break, while making sure the bad officers are punished.
In summary, Jerry, Moose and I got no where...
- Jerry supports some kind of charity model that will help people escape poverty for less money and without the "governmental dependency trap". Unfortunately it seems aimed at those who really are dedicated to changing, growing, learning, etc. And I am not sure what will happen to the kids of the other folks. I guess they go hungry until Mom (and/or Dad see the errors of their ways)
- Moose and Sean seem to want to keep blaming that vague "racism" issue and think that maybe "reparation" payments would help.
- I (ie G2A, John) think it is one BIG MESS and unsure how to change the hearts, minds, beliefs, behaviors, actions, etc of such a large group of people.
- Group 1: Is given government programs and nearly unlimited opportunity for 200+ years and most of them thrive, become educated, learn how to manage money, etc. Some of them squander the opportunity as usually happens.
- Group 2: Is controlled and not given the opportunities noted above for almost 200 years. Most of them fail, lack education, do not learn to manage money because they live hand to mouth, etc. Some of them thrive despite the obstacles as usually happens.
- Group 3: Is made up of people who came from other countries where they had lower levels of education, different cultures and other. The results for these people are a mixed bag.
- So the challenge is to help the people of Group 2 to become equally educated, aware of how to save / invest, work, etc?
- To do this while ensuring the children do not suffer is very challenging, because life long habits and behaviors are HARD to change.
- That said: I am against "reparations payments" because most of them would be squandered without the knowledge and experience to manage money. I am for tough love, meaning that people need to WORK / LEARN for their government provided benefits.
90 comments:
When you label the "racism" problem as 'vague', you lose anyone who understands the history of our country.
Good try, though.
Moose
Moose,
There are many root causes for the things I think should be measured and improved.
Racism can be included as one of the possible root causes BUT unless you have a time machine there is little benefit in thinking and fighting over how these people all got in the mess they are in.
As for "measuring racism today" and changing it seems difficult to say the least.
If we ensure Black, Hispanic and Native American children learn, have 2 parents, have money and avoid gangs. I am pretty sure most of what you call racism will go away.
I mean how often do you hear about "racism" against Asian Americans, India Americans, etc.
A good education and strong families are the key...
Household incomes by Race
Education, Family Type, Poverty
So how do we encourage poor Black, Hispanic, Native American, White, etc adults to:
- strive for education
- strive to get married and stay married
- strive to wait before having children
- learn about money management
- fight the gangs in their communities
- end the addictions that pay the gangs
- etc
How? Offer it to them, show them the advantages, align with their human nature, help them achieve it, all while keeping the wolf from the door until they are "back on their feet" even if they've never been there. In short, CARE.
And you continue to misunderstand my proposal. You insist that the desired state must be obtained instantaneously knowing that is not possible. It took generations to create this politically-dependent underclass, and we will be considered smart if we overcome it in one generation. Smarter still if we start now.
The best place to start is to increase the minimum wage. Another thing that should be done is increase school funding for at-risk students. We should also give more financial aid for college.
Laurie, to what would you raise the minimum wage? $15? $50? $200? Why not? What would happen if the minimum wage were abolished?
I agree, we should have more school funding for at-risk students, but we first need to figure out a way to actually [identify and] educate those particular students. Right now, the state aid formula directs almost twice the funding to those students classified at-risk as it does to the average student, yet academic achievement averages 20% LOWER!
State colleges are heavily subsidized by the taxpayer, including remedial ed for kids who weren't properly educated in HS. Fix /that/ first. Then we have to get over this notion that a college education is necessary for success. I'll tell you a story: I was hired by a large corporation and the first thing they did was hold a very excellent new employee orientation. One of the first questions asked was how many had an engineering degree and about 3/4 of the hands went up. Then they asked how many wanted an engineering job assignment and half the hands went down! Most went into sales or marketing. Waste of 4 years and a LOT of money for a degree never used.
I still think the best place to start is to fix our educational system so that kids can "escape poverty." It's something we can control, we know how to do, and can be done almost immediately though it will take years to "flush out" failure from the system. After that we start on getting every kid into a viable economic household, meaning two parents with at least one working. That will take a lot more work and time.
Laurie,
I think we need to start earlier, too many bad habits and too much long term damage occurs in the birth to 5 year old time frame.
Jerry,
Please name the "magic school" that is working miracles. You have been claiming it exists for years and yet will not name it.
I'm simply pointing to statistics that show some MN school districts performing twice as well for the same money (per pupil) and others spending twice the average for 20% less than average achievement. I am simply never going to accept that "black kids can't learn" that you keep preaching. Educationally disadvantaged kids exist. The public schools are supposed to help them, and do not, simple as that.
Please name the "magic system" that prevents 0-5 from becoming educationally handicapped. Or do you solve that with your usual, prevention of their being born at all? Here's a couple hints:
--We've had Head Start for almost 50 years, yet "the Head Start Impact Study, or HSIS, conducted in 2002, showed that the program produced smaller benefits that faded out by the time the students were in third grade."
--"Decades-spanning longitudinal studies of experimental preschool programs like HighScope/Perry Preschool and Abecedarian find those who participated in these early childhood educational interventions persist in education, have higher earnings and commit fewer crimes than the control group."
Meanwhile, while you are "starting earlier," a whole generation of kids already born gets tossed on the scrap heap.
Jerry,
Please feel free to share any data that shows some status quo districts near each other get twice the money.
So again, how to do we ensure every child is prepared for kindergarten, irregardless of who their Parent(s) are or what neighborhood they live in?
Some Data on Funding
No time to dive into this haystack
Please look up the data From the MN Dept of Ed. Then you can do the laborious analysis I did to arrive at the same answers I have just given you, but which you, as usual, simply dismiss.
So again, how will YOU "ensure every child...." Supposedly government is already doing it, so it is done, right? And if not, the public school system will rapidly erase any gaps in readiness?
So as usual you want government to bail out unlucky kids by fulfilling the role of their irresponsible or incapable parent(s)
And you know a "miracle school" that you will not name and have school funding data that apparently does not match the links I have provided. Yet you can not link to.
And the schools and education departments publish their failings very openly. So we know something needs to change... The question is what? (ie society, parent(s), schools, other?)
Focusing on early childhood is a very good idea (in addition to K-12 and college) is a very good idea.
I think Minnesota does better than most states at providing greater funding to the
K-12 districts with the most at-risk students but based on current test scores it seems we need to do more.
Laurie,
Just throwing money at has not worked yet and I do not see it working going forward. Something has to change systemically. (For example
As long as Jerry keeps ignoring the "parent" faults and you keep focusing on money... I am not sure how things change.
So how do we encourage poor Black, Hispanic, Native American, White, etc adults to:
- strive for education
- strive to get married and stay married
- strive to wait before having children
- learn about money management
- fight the gangs in their communities
- end the addictions that pay the gangs
- etc
I have been having lively debates with Liberals who believe "police unions" are terrible and all the other "public employee unions" are wonderful.
It is so frustrating...
"So as usual you want government to bail out unlucky kids by fulfilling the role of their irresponsible or incapable parent(s)"
I do not know how you can continue to be so wrong. I want government to do what it claims to be doing but is not, because government CAN NOT do those things well if at all. The proof is obvious from things like Head Start or class size reduction that have proven to have essentially no lasting benefit. Government should either get it right or let somebody else do it. They've had long enough.
HCZ. ABC. ANY MN school performing above average. And don't give me that "black kids can't learn" nonsense. The public schools were created and funded to supposedly give everybody equal opportunity and they have failed on a massive scale. Universal vouchers and let the competition begin.
Laurie, the state aid formula (an incomprehensible mish-mash) supposedly fully compensates for the supposed extra cost of educating at-risk kids. I'm OK with the extra cost, except it very obviously is either misdirected or wasted because it is NOT closing our nation-leading education gap.
Jerry,
It is the parent(s) who are supposed to have their kids ready for Kindergarten, and they are supposed to support the children's learning in K-12.... Many of those Parent(s) are FAILING terribly... And you keep wanting to ignore that sad reality.
Oh well...
And HCZ works because they start with the parent(s) and babies. They have no miracles that start in Kindergarten...
Who is your "magic abc" school again?
Here is a disturbing piece that makes the point
My school would benefit from funding for additional title or ELL teachers to provide small groups intervention. With a 20% pass rate on MCAs most students would benefit from small group intervention and only a small percent of students receive this extra instruction.
John, you keep harping on identifying schools better at narrowing the gap. Try this: Look at ANY OTHER state than MN; their gap is smaller.
Laurie (I assume) I'm all for extra funding where it is needed AND can be used effectively. It's a shame the State does not do it that way.
Jerry,
Their gap is smaller because their high scores are lower...
Not sure that is where we want go.
Nations Report Card
What you are really insisting on is that MN schools as a whole, or individually, are entirely incapable of decreasing the gap. Really?
Distraction won't work... Who is the magic school?
I've told you. Any school outside Minnesota. Look at the data you've posted, or go to, I think, "betterschools.com" There is no magic involved here! MN gives more money to schools with "at-risk" kids, using a bizarre formula, but does not require those schools to actually improve, or to have any plans which might improve academic performance. Common sense says that "pay for performance," so common in private business, could easily ACHIEVE better performance. You simply cannot tell me that schools in MN cannot improve, when they are at the bottom of the national rankings.
So many opinions, so little proof.
This source shows that our poor kids do about as well as other states, but our well to do do better than normal
OK, our white kids do better than in other states. So why do our black kids not??
If you look at the tables that our Lucky kids do quite a bit better than norm and our Unlucky kids do about norm.
Did you ever read the FED report I linked to earlier?
I read it. It proves what I have been saying. You still haven't answered the question: Is it possible for MN schools to do better than last place?
Maybe part of MN low scores on MCAs for some students is related to other student factors such as English language learning or poverty. Mpls and St. Paul have a lot of immigrant students.
Laurie,
Jerry is just being difficult now.
Our poor unlucky kids do about the same as those in other states.
It is the fact that our stable family lucky kids do better that makes a the bigger gap.
However I agree that ELL stats would need to be part of the comparison.
BS. If our lucky kids do better, our unlucky kids should do better; deny such common sense though you will. And the gap should be a lot smaller in any event-- it's easier to raise the bottom than to raise the top, IF somebody actually tries. Laurie is correct that our unlucky kids have problems, but the state aid formula supposedly fully compensates for that with more money. And yet the extra money has no effect in many schools. And does quite a bit of good in others. To take John's position is to insist that NO school can possibly educate an unlucky kid. It's nonsense and unacceptable. School attendance is mandatory because of the promise that every child will be educated to their full potential. Why we throw endless money at these unions while letting them avoid all responsibility by blaming the parents is simply beyond me.
Apparently it does not...
" the state aid formula supposedly fully compensates for that with more money"
Parent(s) are the #1 deciding factor if kids will be successful, which does not surprise me at all.
Remember the old saying... "The apple does not fall far from the tree."
Now for the chicken and the egg discussion.
I guess it does not surprise me the we have some of the smartest and most well paid people in the country living here given the number of medical device and other high tech firms that are based here.
And as Laurie noted, we apparently are number one for refugee resettlement. So it makes sense that our gap is HUGE.
Of course that does not mean that is acceptable.
The common themes from the FED report were interesting... Of course with bot the Liberals and Conservatives fighting these, no wonder the kids still suffer. :-(
"A few common themes emerge across these successful school districts and schools. First, schools are given greater autonomy. In New Orleans, the schools under the OPSB were replaced with independent schools that were directly accountable to the state’s RSD. In New York, the Promise Academy was given autonomy in implementing its own community and school programs. The report on high-achieving disadvantaged districts finds that school principals were given autonomy to lead, which helped attract, develop, and retain high-quality teachers.
Second, there is a focus on school quality. Research on the Promise Academy demonstrated that flexibility in teacher recruitment and retention combined with improvements in pedagogical methods led to better outcomes. A common theme in the high-performing disadvantaged districts study is a focus on school quality, including maximizing student learning time and using data and coaching to improve instruction.
Third, support services for students and their families correlate with enhanced education outcomes. Students in the Boston Connects program receive individualized services that are associated with gains in achievement test scores and reductions in dropout rates. Meanwhile, providing a variety of student and family supports is a key strategy to advancing student outcomes in the Harlem Children’s Zone.
These examples indicate that closing achievement gaps is challenging, but possible. "
Jerry,
I have pondering... What is your rationale for this comment?
"If our lucky kids do better, our unlucky kids should do better; deny such common sense though you will."
I mean these folks for the most part:
- have different Parent(s)
- have different incomes
- have different districts
- have different schools
- have different communities
- etc
And the nice thing about the schools that Lucky kids attend. They have fewer disruptive kids and therefore the Teacher can teach more effectively.
Rationale? Isn't it obvious? If the schools can teach "white" kids well, which you claim, then shouldn't they be able to teach black kids equally well (at least in terms of progress), regardless of the educational advantage/disadvantage those kids have? It has long been my contention that the problem is that the schools are designed around educating the typical white "advantaged" kid, and that the poor black kids-- "disadvantaged" as they may be-- are deliberately and systematically left behind. Even your cites tend to prove this. White kids in minority-majority schools do equally well with white kids in minority-minority schools. Black kids in minority-minority schools do better than those in majority-minority schools. That almost says that "the soft bigotry of low expectations" is at work. That where there are high expectations of black kids they do better, or perhaps they get more help if they are behind.
Laurie's idea of "small group intervention" is excellent, and yes, it should be funded. It would be doing what Mississippi did so successfully. Interestingly enough, it would require Minnesota schools to be equally "colorblind" and actually distinguish students based on their ability at the moment, not skin color. All kids are NOT at the same place when they start, and assuming they are leads to eventual failure.
And the nice thing about lucky schools is that they tend to enforce their discipline in a colorblind manner rather than expecting some discipline "quota" based on race.
Jerry,
Well you are starting to sound like a "Black Lives Matter" activist now. :-) The interesting thing as noted in the FED report...
"While Minnesota’s educational disparities are well-known, this report
shows that these disparities are evident across race, ethnicity, and
socioeconomic status. They are equally deep statewide and between
school types. That is, disparities are not limited to Twin Cities metro
area schools or to traditional public schools. This is a challenge for all
of Minnesota."
"These gaps are not only racial; low-income white students significantly trail higher-income white students across Minnesota."
Jerry,
You are absolutely correct that the Unlucky Kids are left behind.
The Parents of Lucky kids move their family or their children to communities / schools to avoid having their children in the schools / classes that are more full of Unlucky kids.
Thus we have created the huge disparities between the demographics and performance of communities / schools. It is a nasty thorny problem.
Mn has lower than average white poverty rate (and higher than average white test scores) and higher than average black poverty rate (and lower than average black test scores.)
The federal govt should increase Title 1 funding and mandate that the funds be used for small group intervention.
Why federal spending on disadvantaged students (Title I) doesn’t work
Laurie,
Yep... That leads to bigger gaps on both fronts.
Now the question is why? Is it all of our immigrants driving down low end wages and test scores?
Or is it something else?
Laurie, I think you have provided all the explanation we need: "...there is little evidence that the overall program is effective or that its funds are used for effective services and activities." Thanks.
If we funded "small group intervention" (rather than other "stuff") based on identifying real educational disadvantage rather than race, and insisted on serious, colorblind discipline, the gap MUST get smaller. All it would take is for the State to mandate it, as a condition for the public school to receive their "compensatory" funding.
So you want to hold school funding hostage, while ignoring why the kids are screwed up in the first place.
The FED recommendation clearly points to a multiple prong solution being required. (Harlem Childrens Zone, City Connects
"A few common themes emerge across these successful school districts and schools. First, schools are given greater autonomy. In New Orleans, the schools under the OPSB were replaced with independent schools that were directly accountable to the state’s RSD. In New York, the Promise Academy was given autonomy in implementing its own community and school programs. The report on high-achieving disadvantaged districts finds that school principals were given autonomy to lead, which helped attract, develop, and retain high-quality teachers.
Second, there is a focus on school quality. Research on the Promise Academy demonstrated that flexibility in teacher recruitment and retention combined with improvements in pedagogical methods led to better outcomes. A common theme in the high-performing disadvantaged districts study is a focus on school quality, including maximizing student learning time and using data and coaching to improve instruction.
Third, support services for students and their families correlate with enhanced education outcomes. Students in the Boston Connects program receive individualized services that are associated with gains in achievement test scores and reductions in dropout rates. Meanwhile, providing a variety of student and family supports is a key strategy to advancing student outcomes in the Harlem Children’s Zone.
These examples indicate that closing achievement gaps is challenging, but possible. "
Reading comprehension seems to be a problem. If you just look at your own quotes, you will see the biggest obstacle to reducing the gap is reducing government control and letting districts focus on school "quality" rather than on hidebound rules and procedures that tend to serve the union and administration rather than the kids. "...flexibility in teacher recruitment and retention combined with improvements in pedagogical methods led to better outcomes." That's all I'm asking. Right now, the status quo, is that government "holds school funding hostage" to compel compliance with all kinds of rules and regulations having nothing to do with student achievement.
Let's get those "better outcomes" that result from this first, because we can do that immediately, by law. As the schools improve, parent and community support will naturally improve, and if some of the money not needed for mandated "fluff" can be turned to food and nutrition programs, etc., that will cause other improvements follow, the kind you seem to think you can mandate to happen beforehand. You're pouring the gasoline without unclogging the funnel or putting it into the gas tank.
Those are not either or options.
If you are dedicated to helping kids escape poverty, you need to start before they are born.
5 plus years lost is too much to overcome in most cases
If you can somehow magically recreate the HCZ model across MN, that might work. But just /saying/ we have "universal pre-K" at the public schools or ECFE provided by government is not the same as actually DELIVERING the benefits of those ideas. HCZ succeeds, IMHO, because it is free of government meddling, and because it CARES about the kids, first and foremost. The way to replicate that kind of result would require legislators and the union to give up lots of their power, and the only way I see that happening is with a universal voucher program giving every parent the right to choose, and creating open competition. I'm open to other ideas for delivering true educational opportunity, but I haven't seen any.
And I don't understand your "either-or" construction. To me it is either [immediately] changing our schools in ways that "...led to better outcomes" or continuing the status quo.
Setting schools up for failure is not "better" for anyone.
I do agree that Unions and Bureaucrats need to get on board for this to work.
so where is hcz failing? is anybody proposing that schools should fail worse than they are? Can you do better? once more: can MN schools do better?
Here is a link for Jerry:
There Is a Right Way to Teach Reading, and Mississippi Knows It
My school does a poor job of teaching reading.
The most successful schools like HCZ start with pre-natal education, stresses parent education, stresses parent accountability, stresses early childhood education, etc...
You know... All those things you like to avoid.
Don't fall back on that old ad hominem about me not wanting good things for all people. YOU are the one continually inventing new excuses for why our public schools are dismal failures at doing what they are well-funded and supposedly designed to do-- educate everybody to their full potential. If Mississippi can greatly improve education for their far-more-impoverished kids, what excuse are you going to give for Minnesota that isn't completely risible? Which do you believe is easier, to alter the way 400 government-run school districts perform their well-defined functions, or to alter the gamut of ingrained behaviors of half a million private individuals in poverty?
Well you do seem to be a "one trick pony"...
Please note that if you select 4th grade reading here. MI is still at/below average and MN is above average.
I surely hope that MI can improve, however they have a long ways to go.
Point is that MS (correct) has greatly improved, and quickly, without doing anything about their poverty/"cultural" issues. And their gap, the subject here, is way smaller than Minnesota's. Why do you keep excusing the poor performance of Minnesota schools for the students that most need a better education? Isn't that racist? The NAACP thinks so.
"Which do you believe is easier, to alter the way 400 government-run school districts perform their well-defined functions, or to alter the gamut of ingrained behaviors of half a million private individuals in poverty?"
Without a change in "ingrained behaviors". Things will not change even if the kids can read a little better.
""A few common themes emerge across these successful school districts and schools. First, schools are given greater autonomy. In New Orleans, the schools under the OPSB were replaced with independent schools that were directly accountable to the state’s RSD. In New York, the Promise Academy was given autonomy in implementing its own community and school programs. The report on high-achieving disadvantaged districts finds that school principals were given autonomy to lead, which helped attract, develop, and retain high-quality teachers.
Second, there is a focus on school quality. Research on the Promise Academy demonstrated that flexibility in teacher recruitment and retention combined with improvements in pedagogical methods led to better outcomes. A common theme in the high-performing disadvantaged districts study is a focus on school quality, including maximizing student learning time and using data and coaching to improve instruction.
Third, support services for students and their families correlate with enhanced education outcomes. Students in the Boston Connects program receive individualized services that are associated with gains in achievement test scores and reductions in dropout rates. Meanwhile, providing a variety of student and family supports is a key strategy to advancing student outcomes in the Harlem Children’s Zone.
These examples indicate that closing achievement gaps is challenging, but possible. "
Remember the goal...
So how do we encourage poor Black, Hispanic, Native American, White, etc adults to:
- strive for education
- strive to get married and stay married
- strive to wait before having children
- learn about money management
- fight the gangs in their communities
- end the addictions that pay the gangs
- etc
There you go again, getting the cart before the horse, and no horse.
Look at what you have just quoted. The first two have to do ONLY with improvements that the schools can make, given the freedom to do so (and maybe the incentive). Only the third refers to those support services for parents, which the schools COULD provide out of their budget, depending on how they decide to close the gap.
I'm still looking at your "encourage" list. Obviously, you do NOT believe it is "easier to alter the way 400 government-run school districts perform their well-defined functions, or to alter the gamut of ingrained behaviors of half a million private individuals in poverty." The fact that the former has happened and the latter has not, over many years and locales, makes your proposal wildly unrealistic. Besides, the best way to "encourage" these changed behaviors is to get these disadvantaged kids a better education, creating more opportunity to break the cycle of poverty and those desirable "cultural" changes will naturally follow.
As I have said before... Between the stubbornness of the Unions, Bureaucrats, Parent(s) and Conservatives like you... Poverty and Unlucky kids will be with us for a LONG time.
Yes, and if the schools were to improve immediately, which they /could/, it would still take 12-18 years to break the cycle of poverty. But it would be a lot quicker than hoping for a miracle like your "encouragement."
And "conservatives like [me]" are doing a lot more, through private charity and educational initiatives, than the [liberal] unions and bureaucrats. Quit blaming the parents! When private school scholarships are offered, and 100 parents show up for a chance at 1 slot, the parents are not the problem.
Unfortunately most Conservatives give most of their money to churches which is the equivalent of funding social clubs in many cases.
Of course the adults who chose to have the children are mostly to blame if the kids do not grow up ready to succeed in the world. That is the job they signed up for when they brought the baby home.
It sure wasn't the schools job to ensure they:
- strive for education
- strive to get married and stay married
- strive to wait before having children
- learn about money management
- fight the gangs in their communities
- end the addictions that pay the gangs
- etc
Individual philanthropists are rare, so most people band together through their churches to support charities of some kind. Of course a lot more people would give to church or charity if the government didn't tax away so much to "do charity" supposedly on their behalf.
You are correct. The only job schools have is to educate all children and, because they do that so poorly, all manner of social ills pop up because of that failure. Hold them responsible for THAT, and eventually these other things get better. Or do you believe schools bear no responsibility, even for their most fundamental responsibility?
Charity reduces your tax load, and yet people give little. And most of a churches budget goes to the building, staff, etc...
Thank God for government mandated wealth redistribution.
I am happy to help and hold them all responsible, you are the one trick pony. :-)
Hold them "all" responsible? Your scattershot blame game accomplishes nothing. How about we start with the schools, who have the primary responsibility for educating children, by law and common expectation. Yes, morally and rightfully it is the parents, but government gives them little choice in the matter. By the time the child reaches 4th grade, her total education has far less to do with what her parents taught than what the schools (were supposed to) teach.
And glad to see you still oppose freedom of religion and religious charity.
Please feel free to keep telling yourself that.
I am fine with giving some to my Church, but I am not kidding myself that it is going to help people escape poverty. We have a really nice church with a great staff... :-)
Yes, and does your church fulfill its primary responsibility with the amount you give it? Surely some in the flock are more sinful and less ready to "go to heaven" than others, so do you insist that they cannot be saved, regardless of what the church does? if not, then why do you allow the schools to fail at their primary responsibility, by blaming the students?
And I will tell you something else. My church has a rich missions program, funded by a "tithe" from the building fund, plus many special offerings and a generous missions budget. We support a large number of "charitable" programs, and I am sure that our volunteer hours are worth even more than our monetary contributions. I am not kidding myself, either. We really ARE [directly engaged with and] helping people to escape poverty.
I am fine with my church, I just keep giving via direct withdrawal.
The struggling schools do the best they can given the dysfunctional parent(s) they have to work with. Again, parent(s) are responsible for their children.
Unfortunately a lot of these supposed parent(s) can not care for themselves, much less the kids.
Here is a school documentary that I accidentally watched today. It was pretty interesting.
Unfortunately to save these kids requires incredible staff and sadly great Grandmas acting as the foster mom...
"a lot of these supposed parent(s) can not care for themselves, much less the kids."
And you just blindly assume that you can decide that this whole class of people do not care for their kids, yet millions of them try to exercise school choice when it is offered, exercise it when they can, and become hopeless when it is continually denied to them. Turn it around: A lot of these schools don't give a d**n about the kids, and many teachers who DO care cannot work within the "system" to do anything about it. Your insistence that the schools are absolved of all responsibility for education is incredibly callous, at best.
I've seen that video before, a couple of times. I'm struck by that word "hopeless." What did I just tell you? It isn't that the parents don't care, it's that nobody cares back. Some (ahem) just want to tell them what bad people they are for having kids, or for not caring for them properly. Schools that actually CARE make changes and results improve. Why are you so dead set against that being allowed to happen?
The druggy Mom and alcoholic Dad of the one little girl likely loved their daughter, however that did not help her or her 2 younger brothers. And yet you would let them keep making babies and taking them home.
Thankfully their Great Grandma cared enough and was capable of taking them in. Unfortunately for millions of kids that is not the situation and why we have an over whelmed foster care system.
Now where have I ever said that schools "do not need to improve"? Remember that I support all 3 FED recommendations.
Now you do know that for all their efforts, the kids of Lucy Laney are still failing academically?
But then again... 89% poverty and 11% homeless is hard to over come.
So, every child that fails in school is the product of "The druggy Mom and alcoholic Dad"? Way to stereotype, big time! No wonder your prescription for improvement are so out of whack-- dealing with this imaginary "bad parent" to the exclusion of the 99% who do not fit your demeaning portrait of them. That is a real number, about the percentage of parents who apply for but do not get an "opportunity scholarship" when they are offered. Imagine what would happen if every parent got one for their kids? That is what the current public schools, AND YOU, are denying them. Why do you hate poor people?
As for Lucy Laney, I see improvement in those numbers, but I suppose you expect instant results. Whereas your program, I should note, has shown zero provable results to date.
Actually it apparently is proven to work.
And you want to ignore this most important time in a child's life
An Interesting Interview with Mr Canada
My school was on the bad school list but I think we improved enough to get off or else they quit making the list. They had someone from a school improvement organization working with us for a few years but that ended.
One thing that makes school improvement difficult at my school is high staff turnover.
One thing that I didn't like about the Lucy Laney movie was the part featuring the mom of 7 kids as a bad mom. It seemed disrespectful to me.
Laurie,
At least Jerry and you seem aligned on the idea that adults should be allowed to make and keep babies no matter what. :-(
Too bad for the babies....
"Actually it apparently is proven to work."-- John
"Community investments alone cannot explain the results." --John's cite.
And notice that the gap is eliminated in elementary school, but only reduced in middle school. As I have said, those who have been failed by the schools in the first few grades never fully recovery from that handicap. Your "most important period in the child's life," apparently, CAN start in kindergarten. It doesn't have to start at age zero.
Here's another quote:
"This suggests that a better community, as measured by poverty rate, does not significantly raise test scores if school quality remains essentially unchanged. Additionally, and far more speculative, there is substantial anecdotal evidence that the Children’s Zone program was ... [started because of] the lack of test-score growth under the community-only model."
At least Laurie and I believe that schools must (and CAN) do better for the overwhelming majority of students whose parents care about and want better for them. You can worry about the tiny few really bad parents if you want.
One more thing schools with at risk students could do if they had the funding is extend the school year. They could start at the beginning of August.
Jerry,
"tiny few really bad parents"
"The scope of the problem
Nearly 700,000 children are abused in the U.S each year. An estimated 678,000 children (unique incidents) were victims of abuse and neglect in 20181, the most recent year for which there is national data. That’s about 1% of kids in a given year. However, this data may be incomplete, and the actual number of children abused is likely underreported.
Child welfare authorities ensure the safety of more than 3.5 million kids. More than 3.5 million children received an investigation or alternative response from child protective services agencies.1 An estimated 1.9 million children received prevention services."
Laurie,
I will let you argue that out with Jerry. He does not think the schools need extra money to do what they should already be doing.
Jerry,
Just a reminder...
I support addressing schools, parent(s) and communities.
Without a change in "ingrained behaviors". Things will not change even if the kids can read a little better.
""A few common themes emerge across these successful school districts and schools. First, schools are given greater autonomy. In New Orleans, the schools under the OPSB were replaced with independent schools that were directly accountable to the state’s RSD. In New York, the Promise Academy was given autonomy in implementing its own community and school programs. The report on high-achieving disadvantaged districts finds that school principals were given autonomy to lead, which helped attract, develop, and retain high-quality teachers.
Second, there is a focus on school quality. Research on the Promise Academy demonstrated that flexibility in teacher recruitment and retention combined with improvements in pedagogical methods led to better outcomes. A common theme in the high-performing disadvantaged districts study is a focus on school quality, including maximizing student learning time and using data and coaching to improve instruction.
Third, support services for students and their families correlate with enhanced education outcomes. Students in the Boston Connects program receive individualized services that are associated with gains in achievement test scores and reductions in dropout rates. Meanwhile, providing a variety of student and family supports is a key strategy to advancing student outcomes in the Harlem Children’s Zone.
These examples indicate that closing achievement gaps is challenging, but possible. "
Laurie and I agree; I don't understand why you would believe otherwise. Where you get confused is that I believe the funds being used to "fully compensate" for academically disadvantaged kids is not being spent wisely. If it were, schools with "fully compensated" funding would be doing better, rather than worse as is now the case. BUT, if the schools can point to programs that would truly raise academic achievement, like Laurie's small group intervention or Reading is Fundamental or ...., then I think we can easily justify those investments as solutions having a substantial return. And we should, rather than just "throwing money at the problem."
Meanwhile, you are trying to solve the problem for those 1% of kids that are actually abused, while condemning the 99% to being abused and crippled for life by an inadequate education. Heartless.
And you do not consider how schools can change "ingrained behaviors."
Unfortunately for the kids... Nothing is going to change...
Their needs will continue to be a lower priority than their Teacher's and Parent(s)' wants to folks like you and the Liberals....
Hey, don't blame me. I've been working with the legislature (getting frustrated), with the school board (largely ignored) and directly with the individual students (with considerable success). Laurie is even more dedicated and I applaud her. I wish the government would, like a good CEO, recognize the ability of their line employees to spot problems and suggest solutions. But it's government.
And why slander teachers and parents? I think we've established that most of them want much better for the kids than what they are getting, but the current /system/ of public education prevents it. You want change? You will have to change the system, starting with getting government to give up their [incompetent] micromanagement.
The path to hell as usual is paved with good intentions.
What the Parent(s), Teachers and you want is immaterial.
It is what the kids get that matters. And unfortunately a lot of them get little.
Post a Comment