Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Although I think this has got to be changing in recent years, traditionally, inner cities were inhabited by poor folks. Many inner cities are now being refurbished to attract suburban people with higher incomes and young professionals.
While your answer seems blunt, it is pretty accurate. More than that, Parents from "better neighborhoods" are more educated themselves and tend to want their kids to study and do well. I honestly don't feel Parents from the inner city are a strong enough influence toward pushing their kids to excel.
I once knew a lady teacher who taught in Detroit's inner city and she actually feared for her well being every day that she taught there. She went into it thinking she could make a difference, but she soon realized she had zero support from the Parents, the kids were out of control, and the school system just wanted to get them passed on and gone.
As much as we may not like to hear it, the breakdown of the American family has created a whole new generation of under achievers. When there are not strong, supportive Parents to make sure their kids are going to school and working hard the whole system fails. Teachers can not do it on their own.
There are usually a higher proportion of special education students in urban public schools. That means that while these schools may have more funding and more teachers, most of that extra funding and most of those additional teachers and specialists are working with only a subset of the enrollment. This is something that's often overlooked and very difficult to account for when simply looking at per pupil expenditures and "average" class sizes.
In a very simplified example, let's say you have 40 kids, 8 of which are special education, and two teachers each making $50,000. That means that while you have an "average" class size of 20, in reality you have one class of 32 and one class of 8. And while $2,500 is spent "per student" for teacher salaries, in reality the students in one class are seeing $1,562.50 per student for teacher salaries, while the other class is seeing $6,250 per student in teacher salaries.
While I'm certain, again, that 90% of the problems in urban schools are being brought in from home by the students, there definitely are some funding issues that despite decent steps taken by the Federal government and many states, is still an issue. If nothing else, the issues surrounding finances or the mandates required for special education needs to be addressed, because it's a huge challenge for urban and rural districts, where these students are overwhelmingly concentrated.
I understand all that. However, that's not any documentation.
It's not only "poor parents working lots of hours". Those kids are some of the most respectful, better achieving students in classes in the inner city schools.
Many of these kids live in single parent households and bounce around between relatives when either of the parents are in jail. Some even live permanently with their grandparents that look more like parents than grandparents while their parents look more like their older brother or sister.
NAILED IT.
And while you can't blame the kids, it's still not the fault of whites, or any other racial group, for their situations.
I have also seen the ways black "parents" talk to their children. Ever seen a toddler called the N-word 3 times in one 'sentence'? I have and guess what, that wasn't the fault of white folks either when it's coming out of the parent's mouth.
I can also tell you this: Baltimore City's schools spend about 17k per pupil per year (with all of K-12 totaling about $221,000, nearly a quarter of a million per student, in total). Think about that, $17,000 per pupil...per year (much of it state money taxed from other jurisdictions)....and for what?
The surrounding suburban schools spend in the 10k-12k range per pupil per year. That's still a lot of excess in my opinion, but it's a huge difference (about 65-91k difference over the course of 13 years), and those suburban schools still manage to attain far better outcomes.
So it's clearly not a money thing. It's a lifestyle and attitude thing. I also wouldn't chalk it up to "the parents are working long hours" nonsense. Sorry, but often the parents are partying and having fun for long hours while the grandparents (who themselves may only be in their 40's) are raising the neglected kids.
Paragraph 1: Please provide some documentation on your first statement. Per-pupil costs are generally higher in low-income schools, meaning in general class size is smaller. I have heard, anecdotally, that the more inexperienced teachers get placed in lower-income schools.
Paragraph 2: Many schools participate in the school breakfast program, in fact, I believe almost all large city schools do so. Free and reduced price breakfasts are available. School Breakfast Program (SBP) | Food and Nutrition Service
Lack of responsible adults is probably a big factor. I think the families where the parents are working 2-3 jobs are probably more responsible than others, though those parents may not be able to go to PTO meetings and such.
Para 3: Yeah, big school systems have a lot of bureaucracy, in fact most systems seem to suffer from that. I don't know how that problem can be solved; it seems to be ingrained.
Para 4: I don't think anyone on this thread has said they don't care about inner-city kids.
Federal funding varies per geographic area; even if there is more spent per pupil, that doesn't mean that those funds are being directed toward reducing the teacher student ratio. When adjustments are made to compensate for the additional resources needed in inner city schools it turns out that inner city schools actually spend less per student than their suburban counterparts.
Yes, thankfully there are school breakfast programs- that may not be enough to provide the good nutrition a child needs if they aren't getting a good diet at home.
No idea what to do about the bureaucracy either, but we need to be willing to think outside the box to fix it- there are numerous successful private schools with innovative programs in inner cities- so it is possible to provide a good educational product privately, so why not in public education.
Federal funding varies per geographic area; even if there is more spent per pupil, that doesn't mean that those funds are being directed toward reducing the teacher student ratio. When adjustments are made to compensate for the additional resources needed in inner city schools it turns out that inner city schools actually spend less per student than their suburban counterparts.
Yes, thankfully there are school breakfast programs- that may not be enough to provide the good nutrition a child needs if they aren't getting a good diet at home.
No idea what to do about the bureaucracy either, but we need to be willing to think outside the box to fix it- there are numerous successful private schools with innovative programs in inner cities- so it is possible to provide a good educational product privately, so why not in public education.
Oh, come on! You can always twist the statistics to "prove" what you want to prove.
The teachers are terrible, the administrators are terrible, the students are terrible, and the parents are terrible. Also the board of education tends to be terrible along with the politicians who appoint them (if appointed).
Oh, come on! You can always twist the statistics to "prove" what you want to prove.
The private schools cherry pick their students.
Since I didn't provide any statistics there isn't anything to twist....
Your mind is already made up, so I doubt that any statistics I provide would satisfy you.
A two minute Google search brings this up:
GAO Government Accounting Office Report 2002 Per-Pupil Spending Differences between Selected Inner City and Suburban Schools Varied by Metropolitan Area
Certain................UMMMMM, "cultures" value education a lot less than other "cultures".
The Vietnamese boat-people, many who came here penniless, illiterate in English, and having just experienced horrific tragedy.....outdo many of our homegrown, inner-city dwellers.
It's the parent's values, the student's internal drive and positive teachers. My great-grandfather couldn't read or write. My grandparents and parents only went to school through 12th grade. The one common thread that was passed down was a thirst for learning and education.
Learning to read at an early age (I think) is most beneficial for kids in inner city schools. They need to get ahead early because the environment isn't laid out for them to catch up later. If you fall behind in an inner city school system, you'll be twice as far behind of kids in better school districts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
