Is this going to be addressed or will local tax bases continue to dictate which kids are given countless opportunities versus which kids get less chances in dilapidated schools?
Rich schools versus poor schools
- Thread starter HighStickHarry
- Start date
The Robin Hood program worked real well for cleaning up Dallas schools.
Probably not a blueprint one would want to follow, then.
The problem with the debate of rich schools vs. poor schools is that its not a money issue. Its a values and work ethic issue. In general, kids in rich schools are surrounded by parents who valued education enough to prioritize it. The same isn't true in the poorer districts. Now there are individuals in poor districts who value education. And those usually show up as the kids who eventually escape the cycle. But no amount of excess funding will educate an unmotivated individual.
Which is the worst time to receive dividends.
The schools are vastly uneven putting poor kids on a predictable life track before they turn five.
I do want to hear the ins and outs of Dallas schools plan.
But parents make these decisions more than schools do. The schools are made up of kids who are a reflection of the values and principles of their parents. So when an 'inner city' school is considered bad, its not because its underfunded. Its because not enough people sending their kids there care and too many see it as a daycare.
I'll give you a perfect example: Would you agree that Yukon Schools are better than Oklahoma City Schools? I think that's a pretty easy answer. One's a nice middle-class, albeit older, suburb, and one is primarily inner city and urban. Yet, when it comes to Per-pupil expenditures, OKCPS spends $8397 per student whereas Yukon spends a paltry $6722. Mustang spends $6468.
https://sdeweb01.sde.ok.gov/OCAS_Reporting/Districts.aspx
This should clearly show as evidence that simply increasing expenditures doesn't solve the education problem. I'm not saying that we shouldn't spend more on education. But this mentality that spending more money will simply solve our education crisis is counter to the evidence above.
(Note: I grew up in Yukon and Mustang so chose the districts I knew).
I believe we must do more, but I won't compromise for my own kids either... happy to pay $18k a year in property taxes AND pay for any new bonds AND donate 5 figures to the school foundation because I know our schools are efficient and effective.
Until or unless others are willing to make similar investments, the system is going to be very uneven and suck for a lot of kids.
Our district spends more than $14k per student. We get results that show the value of that investment including some of the highest college attendance rates in the country.
Until or unless others are willing to make similar investments, the system is going to be very uneven and suck for a lot of kids.
Our district spends more than $14k per student. We get results that show the value of that investment including some of the highest college attendance rates in the country.
First, it's not an either/or issue -- it's both.
It's absolutely a money issue. OKC public vs. private schools that I've seen are night and day in the quality of instruction, administration, and yes, parental involvement.
A bad parent's kid can absolutely be motivated and have discipline and self esteem instilled if they spend hours every day in a great educational environment. A logical extension of what you're saying is that teachers and coaches don't matter if there's apathetic or bad parenting. LOTS of kids that had bad parents will shout from the rooftops that exceptional educational influences (teachers and coaches) had a profound positive influence in their lives. I've seen it too many times.
Does that dollar amount include free lunches and breakfast?
I do not believe the kids should be punished because of their parents. Maybe the big schools should pay a luxury taxe so that hazard pay for teachers at inner city schools can be offered. Also if kids disrupt they should go to jail for six months.
Yes, it does but the breakdown is in each of the links for the districts. OKC spends about $4500 on instruction per student whereas Yukon and Mustang spend 3.6 & 3.7K respectively.
Private schools are a different comparison than what I made. They require parental commitment. As for coaches and teachers influencing kids? Absolutely, it can happen although I think it happens for individuals and very rarely as a collective group. I'd also debate how often it happens in non-caring parents homes. If it happened that often, our inner city schools wouldn't be what they are. BTW, I'd note a difference between a working single mother home where she just isn't present vs. one that doesn't care. That work ethic is often inhereted by the kid.) I'd also note that coaches are different than teachers. Society celebrates sports success. It has positive motivation supporting it. Unfortunately, education lacks this. (Show me the MTV show about kids studying or demonstrating good choices as opposed to such winners as Teen mom).
But in the end, I agree that there needs to be more investment in education. Don't miss that message. I just disagree with this premise that more money is the cure for what ails it.
While funding is always an issue in public education, nothing will ever be solved until we address the failing social issues of our society. Some will point to successful school district being successful due to funding, when the reality is the success is a result of that district's society.
Think about your own children and the district they are in. Are you stressing good grades, good behavior and when needed, discipline? Are the kids in failing districts getting the same?
Think about your own children and the district they are in. Are you stressing good grades, good behavior and when needed, discipline? Are the kids in failing districts getting the same?
