Share and discuss this blog

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Only poor kids in school; why would someone send their kid to public school if they didn't have to? Mr Obama surely doesn't

This news appeared today (from Washington Post):

For the first time in at least 50 years, a majority of U.S. public school students come from low-income families, according to a new analysis of 2013 federal data, a statistic that has profound implications for the nation.

The Southern Education Foundation reports that 51 percent of students in pre-kindergarten through 12th grade in the 2012-2013 school year were eligible for the federal program that provides free and reduced-price lunches. The lunch program is a rough proxy for poverty, but the explosion in the number of needy children in the nation’s public classrooms is a recent phenomenon that has been gaining attention among educators, public officials and researchers.


Why is this true do you think? Seems simple enough. If you can possibly afford it you wouldn’t even think about sending your kid to public school unless there happened to be a safe school with interesting and fun teachers who did exciting things in a public school nearby. And what are the odds of that?

Thank you Mr Bush, and Mr Obama, and especially Mr Duncan, for making school even worse than it was before by having a policy of constant testing to see how everyone is doing. Under the guise of helping poor people do better you have pushed richer people out of the system. No one wants to use your public schools. Try thinking about that the next time you make more standards that make school a nightmare of test preparation and testing.

The latest salvo was from Mr Obama and his henchman Tom Hanks, trying to convince everyone that it is ok for high school to be an awful experience because you can go to Community College for free and that will solve everything, The New York Time printed that and I am guessing that Obama;s staff wrote it. They will do anything to avoid the obvious conclusion that the schools aren't working.


Here is a simple idea: let people who want to make changes in high schools make them. We can teach job skills, life skills, and make it fun. Or, we could make all the poor people learn algebra, chemistry, and history so they can remain poor having learned nothing of use to them.

1 comment:

Bert Gold said...

My kids were both homeschooled. I was afraid of it at first, thinking that they needed rigor for science and math. But, I was wrong. They picked it up just fine, thorough informal classes and, eventually, one went to high school and the other is taking courses at a community college.

American education is a disaster because we insist on one size fits all (and one test score, or a series of test scores, a track does make). We are wrong. Students are each unique individuals; but there is no money and no quantification possible with that view. And, furthermore, that view tends not to support the inculcation of sheeple who will vote for our sanctimonious but incompetent political leaders.

I've little faith left in what used to be called 'democracy' in America. The plutocrats and sheeple now have their way. Except for the poor: They must obey in order to get sufficient food and sustenance.