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.
Just did a random search which said the public city high schools average a 69-72% graduation rate. To me, that's expected in a city. You are just going to have kids who don't see education the way you and I do. It's not the school's fault, nor does it effect my son's drive.
Not sure what you mean with which one costs more? Around here, it is typical for schools considered failing to spend more money than successful schools since urban schools have to pay for more things suburban schools wouldn't have to (special ed, social program style services, and supplies - i.e. most kids in the suburbs parents can pay for calculators, while city kids normally borrow them from school).[/
Have you ever taken the time to look at school spending per students between the different school district? The differences in amount is a lot more than free calculators or even free/subsidized lunch.
Look up something similar to this in your home state.
Just an illustration that all sorts of schools have problems with violence. It's not an inner-city thing or a suburban thing or a rural thing. It's an every school thing.
The rate, frequency, severity, and overall 'expectedness' of the violence are very very different though.
Come on, I mean this is a silly argument. You just can't say that a safe highly rated school in a quiet affluent suburb is exactly the same as an inner-city school with gang and drug issues, just because there may be a shooting by a mentally ill kid at a suburban school somewhere once in a blue moon. The really 'bad' schools have violent incidents going on constantly as par for the course (hence metal detectors etc), we just don't hear about it because it's, in a way, expected and not reported.
This is like saying you could, technically, potentially, get mugged or shot walking down the street anywhere - even in the nicest safest area. Which is true, you could - but what's the chance of that happening, as opposed to walking down a street in the bad part of LA or Detroit somewhere?
The rate, frequency, severity, and overall 'expectedness' of the violence are very very different though.
Come on, I mean this is a silly argument. You just can't say that a safe highly rated school in a quiet affluent suburb is exactly the same as an inner-city school with gang and drug issues, just because there may be a shooting by a mentally ill kid at a suburban school somewhere once in a blue moon. The really 'bad' schools have violent incidents going on constantly as par for the course (hence metal detectors etc), we just don't hear about it because it's, in a way, expected and not reported.
This is like saying you could, technically, potentially, get mugged or shot walking down the street anywhere - even in the nicest safest area. Which is true, you could - but what's the chance of that happening, as opposed to walking down a street in the bad part of LA or Detroit somewhere?
You have two people on this thread that actually have experience with inner city schools that say at times that felt safer there. Why so adamant to point out it's still better in the suburbs. Overall, I'm glad my younger three are in the burbs but when it comes to the kids being victim of random violence, I worry more about them then I do my son. The kid's in his school that are involved in something violent are not innocent victims. The inner city school doesn't have that many kids whose mental illnesses can be hidden (something wealthy families specialize in), any parent in denial in the city normally doesn't get a lawyer to demand their potentially dangerous child remain in school, nor do they have access to a ton of resources where they can pull a mass attack off. They usually don't have anxiety over stupid little materialistic things either. And as I said, the stats on arrests in our city school is constantly reported as it's constantly looked at by the BOE. Not sure if that happens in other states though.
The rate, frequency, severity, and overall 'expectedness' of the violence are very very different though.
Come on, I mean this is a silly argument. You just can't say that a safe highly rated school in a quiet affluent suburb is exactly the same as an inner-city school with gang and drug issues, just because there may be a shooting by a mentally ill kid at a suburban school somewhere once in a blue moon. The really 'bad' schools have violent incidents going on constantly as par for the course (hence metal detectors etc), we just don't hear about it because it's, in a way, expected and not reported.
This is like saying you could, technically, potentially, get mugged or shot walking down the street anywhere - even in the nicest safest area. Which is true, you could - but what's the chance of that happening, as opposed to walking down a street in the bad part of LA or Detroit somewhere?
Notice that you said "bad" schools and the fact that this thread is about "poor" schools. Not all "poor" schools are full of violence and drugs and terrible academically. (I know people who went to much "better off" schools, and those schools by far had a much bigger drug problem than the "poor" schools that I went to.
By the way, one of my friends in college went to a school that's considered to be "better" and isn't at all poor. What happened there? They had a full on riot. Again, judge schools individually.
What's going on in Denver? Anyway, ok...every inner city school is beyond awful. Suburbs are better. No violence has ever been reported at any suburban schools in Colorado. Actually, didn't I say "random" violence?
Littleton, Co. - Columbine HS is a surburban school in Colorado.
On Friday, an unnamed student walked into the cafeteria of Arapahoe High School, stalking a certain teacher, authorities said. Instead, he ended up shooting a fellow student and injuring another before turning the gun on himself and committing suicide.
The violence in inner city schools is also not *random.*
The Wall Street Journal reports that over the last 10 years violent crime has spiked in the suburbs while tapering off in cities. Using data from the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Brookings Institution, WSJ reporters found that suburban homicide rates increased 16.9 percent between 2001 and 2010, while large cities saw a 16.7 percent decline over the same period.
Bottom line, poorer school districts have a higher numbers of parents who don't give a damn about nurturing their children. You end up with emotionally-unstable students who lack a respect for authority figures, leading teachers to focus more on managing misbehaviors than actually teaching.
I have no answers for Columbine or Arapahoe HS. No one seems to.
However, that link of yours is very disingenuous. As a math person, you should be able to recognize "how to lie with statistics". The blog says first that suburban homicides are about 1/4 of the homicides in the US, up from 20.7% in 2001. Makes it sound awful. However, suburban population is rising. Rural population is about 19%. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.RUR.TOTL.ZS That makes urban population 81%. Of this 81%, the urban core population is now 14% of metro populations, with 86% suburban. So the total suburban population is ~ 69% but has 25% of the crime! That's still quite low. The Long Term: Metro America Goes From 82% to 86% Suburban Since 1990 | Newgeography.com
Later, the blog talks about percent increases and decreases, without stating what the actual rates are!
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 05-10-2015 at 12:33 PM..
Bottom line, poorer school districts have a higher numbers of parents who don't give a damn about nurturing their children. You end up with emotionally-unstable students who lack a respect for authority figures, leading teachers to focus more on managing misbehaviors than actually teaching.
I can agree that is an issue in the urban school, but there are still more good kids than bad there. By a certain point, the good kids are kind of segregated also. But I disagree that no emotionally-unstable students exist in the suburban schools. Not only have I seen plenty of that, but I've seen the opposite type of parent fight to keep their kid a danger to others and they normally win. City schools have an easier time getting bad kids to withdraw or placed in an alternative program than wealthier schools.
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.
