Myth: low income students do better in schools with <25% FARMs rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything you do in the schools is just treating a symptom not the disease. If you don’t fix the challenges facing the families it is just like bailing out a boat with a hole in the bottom.

+1
No one wants to discuss the big elephant in the room. It is not the school's responsibility that people choose to breed children into the world that they can not afford to raise period! If we are not going to discuss the larger societal problem of poverty, then injecting poor students into wealthy schools is pointless.

We are not discussing family planning, birth control, parental courses, parental counseling, etc. before these kids are even born. The American society refuses to address poverty and now schools have to take on the impossible task of playing the role of a foster parent to kids who should not have been born in the first place from individuals who have no business breeding children.

My prediction is that many wealthy and UMC families will run to private schools. Public schools will become flooded with FARMS, have limited resources, and have a ton of academic obstacles all because individuals refuse to utilize birth control. This is a birth control issue and not a school issue.

Why are schools being blame for parent's lack of personal responsibility? Why didn't these folks have access to birth control, financial planning courses, or parental classes before they decided to bring a child into the world? We need to start teaching family planning, life skill courses, and financial planning starting in high school so that folks will learn from an early age that is not okay to breed children into poverty. Access to free birth control will decrease so many issues.

This sounds like eugenics.

It's not eugenics. We're importing unskilled, uneducated, illiterate poverty to our sanctuary city to the tune of 10000s a year. And more in the country as a whole. It's a huge cluster*ck in the public schools in CA, MD, FL, TX, AZ. Total mess: kids are 2-4 grade levels behind, graduate and need remedial everything, high absenteeism, high drop-off and teen pregnancy rates, and never master English reading, writing or speaking. Total mess.

Honestly ask your self “so what?”

You’re right but you’ll have cheap nannies, law care and produce. Your idiot brother in law will have his prison guard job, your sappy cousin her social worker job. Your wife and you can enjoy that tasty Mexican restaurant on your 1.5 date nights a month.

Honestly so what that there are a bunch of cars in the slow lane when you have an easy pass? While you have to pay for their road, I am pretty sure we get more than our pound of flesh

This is ALL it comes down to. This is all people care about. That, and votes, I guess.

People are willing to overlook all the negatives created by being a Sanctuary County, as long as they can get their lawn mowed every two weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's not eugenics. We're importing unskilled, uneducated, illiterate poverty to our sanctuary city to the tune of 10000s a year. And more in the country as a whole. It's a huge cluster*ck in the public schools in CA, MD, FL, TX, AZ. Total mess: kids are 2-4 grade levels behind, graduate and need remedial everything, high absenteeism, high drop-off and teen pregnancy rates, and never master English reading, writing or speaking. Total mess.

Nah. We (however we are) aren't importing (whatever you mean by that) poverty. Rather, people are choosing to come here. And why? For the same reasons my grandparents and great-grandparents chose to come here - economic opportunity, freedom from fear, a better life for their children, in a place where there's already a community of people from their country.

Everything you're saying now, people said about my grandparents and great-grandparents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not eugenics. We're importing unskilled, uneducated, illiterate poverty to our sanctuary city to the tune of 10000s a year. And more in the country as a whole. It's a huge cluster*ck in the public schools in CA, MD, FL, TX, AZ. Total mess: kids are 2-4 grade levels behind, graduate and need remedial everything, high absenteeism, high drop-off and teen pregnancy rates, and never master English reading, writing or speaking. Total mess.

Nah. We (however we are) aren't importing (whatever you mean by that) poverty. Rather, people are choosing to come here. And why? For the same reasons my grandparents and great-grandparents chose to come here - economic opportunity, freedom from fear, a better life for their children, in a place where there's already a community of people from their country.

Everything you're saying now, people said about my grandparents and great-grandparents.

+1

People are fleeing the horrible situations in their Central American countries, which the U.S. created in the Reagan error. IOW, we are reaping what we sowed ourselves.

They are choosing to have children, as humans do. (Presumably you don't refer to the people in Somerset or Carderock as "breeding." They "have children." Correct?) They are entitled to do that.

The racism and hatred in this forum are despicable.

[Anonymous]

Its been long known that things that go on at home affect a person's aptitude. However, that does not mean that every low income child will be Einstein if their home life is suddenly all roses. I wonder if there is a study that looks at boarding schools on the academic performance of low income children.

As a society I don't think the surface level things we do with education are enough to fix the actual problem. The actual problem is everything that comes with poverty in a nation as wealthy as ours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its been long known that things that go on at home affect a person's aptitude. However, that does not mean that every low income child will be Einstein if their home life is suddenly all roses. I wonder if there is a study that looks at boarding schools on the academic performance of low income children.

As a society I don't think the surface level things we do with education are enough to fix the actual problem. The actual problem is everything that comes with poverty in a nation as wealthy as ours.

There are many actual problems. Some are more comprehensive, some are narrower, all are actual problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course, low-income students do better at schools that lack concentrated poverty. Who wouldn't? There have been hundreds of studies that show this to be true.

Shh - don't tell the Republicants. It's funny to hear them complain about these fictions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, low-income students do better at schools that lack concentrated poverty. Who wouldn't? There have been hundreds of studies that show this to be true.

Shh - don't tell the Republicants. It's funny to hear them complain about these fictions.

If poor kids do better when not around other poor kids because poor kids are a distraction, tell me again why poor kids aren’t a distractions to well off kids?

Also how do you do the math when there is 3 poor kids for every rich kid that the schools equal this utopia?

Or is what you want a world where rich kids don’t automatically get what your kid has to test into and cross their fingers that they studied as hard as the Asian kids to avoid all the basic kids doing basic stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, low-income students do better at schools that lack concentrated poverty. Who wouldn't? There have been hundreds of studies that show this to be true.

Shh - don't tell the Republicants. It's funny to hear them complain about these fictions.

If poor kids do better when not around other poor kids because poor kids are a distraction, tell me again why poor kids aren’t a distractions to well off kids?

Also how do you do the math when there is 3 poor kids for every rich kid that the schools equal this utopia?

Or is what you want a world where rich kids don’t automatically get what your kid has to test into and cross their fingers that they studied as hard as the Asian kids to avoid all the basic kids doing basic stuff.

Nobody has said that this is the reason.

Also, those "Asian kids" are Asian-American kids.

Also, some Asian-American kids study hard. And some don't.

[Anonymous]

It’s really sickening how some posters talk about “poor kids” like it’s some kind of genetic mutation that makes them poor and stupid. It is just a lower income bracket it’s not a criminal gene, it is not a factor in intelligence, potential or anything else it’s simply an income status. You people are vile

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s really sickening how some posters talk about “poor kids” like it’s some kind of genetic mutation that makes them poor and stupid. It is just a lower income bracket it’s not a criminal gene, it is not a factor in intelligence, potential or anything else it’s simply an income status. You people are vile

This is an interesting article. https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/traits/intelligence

Like most aspects of human behavior and cognition, intelligence is a complex trait that is influenced by both genetic and environmental factors.

Intelligence is also strongly influenced by the environment. Factors related to a child’s home environment and parenting, education and availability of learning resources, and nutrition, among others, all contribute to intelligence. A person’s environment and genes influence each other, and it can be challenging to tease apart the effects of the environment from those of genetics. For example, if a child’s IQ is similar to that of his or her parents, is that similarity due to genetic factors passed down from parent to child, to shared environmental factors, or (most likely) to a combination of both? It is clear that both environmental and genetic factors play a part in determining intelligence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really sickening how some posters talk about “poor kids” like it’s some kind of genetic mutation that makes them poor and stupid. It is just a lower income bracket it’s not a criminal gene, it is not a factor in intelligence, potential or anything else it’s simply an income status. You people are vile

This is an interesting article. https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/traits/intelligence

Like most aspects of human behavior and cognition, intelligence is a complex trait that is influenced by both genetic and environmental factors.

Intelligence is also strongly influenced by the environment. Factors related to a child’s home environment and parenting, education and availability of learning resources, and nutrition, among others, all contribute to intelligence. A person’s environment and genes influence each other, and it can be challenging to tease apart the effects of the environment from those of genetics. For example, if a child’s IQ is similar to that of his or her parents, is that similarity due to genetic factors passed down from parent to child, to shared environmental factors, or (most likely) to a combination of both? It is clear that both environmental and genetic factors play a part in determining intelligence.

Your point?
People are not genetically poor you idiot. Low and high income is relative. What is considered average income in many lower costs of living areas. Vile(and stupid)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really sickening how some posters talk about “poor kids” like it’s some kind of genetic mutation that makes them poor and stupid. It is just a lower income bracket it’s not a criminal gene, it is not a factor in intelligence, potential or anything else it’s simply an income status. You people are vile

This is an interesting article. https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/traits/intelligence

Like most aspects of human behavior and cognition, intelligence is a complex trait that is influenced by both genetic and environmental factors.

Intelligence is also strongly influenced by the environment. Factors related to a child’s home environment and parenting, education and availability of learning resources, and nutrition, among others, all contribute to intelligence. A person’s environment and genes influence each other, and it can be challenging to tease apart the effects of the environment from those of genetics. For example, if a child’s IQ is similar to that of his or her parents, is that similarity due to genetic factors passed down from parent to child, to shared environmental factors, or (most likely) to a combination of both? It is clear that both environmental and genetic factors play a part in determining intelligence.

Your point?
People are not genetically poor you idiot. Low and high income is relative. What is considered average income in many lower costs of living areas. Vile(and stupid)

All of the environmental factors that NIH listed that affect intelligence outside of genetics can be severely impacted by low income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, low-income students do better at schools that lack concentrated poverty. Who wouldn't? There have been hundreds of studies that show this to be true.

Shh - don't tell the Republicants. It's funny to hear them complain about these fictions.

If poor kids do better when not around other poor kids because poor kids are a distraction, tell me again why poor kids aren’t a distractions to well off kids?

Also how do you do the math when there is 3 poor kids for every rich kid that the schools equal this utopia?

Or is what you want a world where rich kids don’t automatically get what your kid has to test into and cross their fingers that they studied as hard as the Asian kids to avoid all the basic kids doing basic stuff.

DP.

the reason why poor kids do better in a school with lower FARMS rate is because of resources.

In a school with high poverty, the needs are greater, and so you need more resources to attend to those needs. But we don't have unlimited resources.

In a school with lower FARMs rate, the needs aren't as great so it's easier to address needs with the resources that currently exist in that school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, low-income students do better at schools that lack concentrated poverty. Who wouldn't? There have been hundreds of studies that show this to be true.

Shh - don't tell the Republicants. It's funny to hear them complain about these fictions.

If poor kids do better when not around other poor kids because poor kids are a distraction, tell me again why poor kids aren’t a distractions to well off kids?

Also how do you do the math when there is 3 poor kids for every rich kid that the schools equal this utopia?

Or is what you want a world where rich kids don’t automatically get what your kid has to test into and cross their fingers that they studied as hard as the Asian kids to avoid all the basic kids doing basic stuff.

DP.

the reason why poor kids do better in a school with lower FARMS rate is because of resources.

In a school with high poverty, the needs are greater, and so you need more resources to attend to those needs. But we don't have unlimited resources.

In a school with lower FARMs rate, the needs aren't as great so it's easier to address needs with the resources that currently exist in that school.

What resources? Esol teachers are allocated based on the number of students in each school. It is the same for SE teachers and aids. The classrooms are smaller in title 1 and focus schools. There are daycares in HS but I don't know they are for students or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course, low-income students do better at schools that lack concentrated poverty. Who wouldn't? There have been hundreds of studies that show this to be true.

Shh - don't tell the Republicants. It's funny to hear them complain about these fictions.

If poor kids do better when not around other poor kids because poor kids are a distraction, tell me again why poor kids aren’t a distractions to well off kids?

Also how do you do the math when there is 3 poor kids for every rich kid that the schools equal this utopia?

Or is what you want a world where rich kids don’t automatically get what your kid has to test into and cross their fingers that they studied as hard as the Asian kids to avoid all the basic kids doing basic stuff.

DP.

the reason why poor kids do better in a school with lower FARMS rate is because of resources.

In a school with high poverty, the needs are greater, and so you need more resources to attend to those needs. But we don't have unlimited resources.

In a school with lower FARMs rate, the needs aren't as great so it's easier to address needs with the resources that currently exist in that school.

What resources? Esol teachers are allocated based on the number of students in each school. It is the same for SE teachers and aids. The classrooms are smaller in title 1 and focus schools. There are daycares in HS but I don't know they are for students or not.

We were talking about poor kids, not ESOL or Special Education, weren't we?

And maybe you think that smaller class sizes in the lower grades in elementary schools fully address the greater needs of schools where lots of students come from poor families, but you won't find many who agree with you.