Majority of U.S. public school students are in poverty

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think its important to remember this is about poverty for kids enrolled in PUBLIC SCHOOLS. thats not the same as sayiing 50% of ALL kids in US live in poverty. I don't know the second number but I would assume its less than 50%. I think part of this number is a reflection of more and more parents putting their kids in private, charter and home school. bascially you are seeing a pheonomenom where parents who do have a choice, choose to leave public schools. They may also live in poverty but for whatever reason of ability, have pulled their kids out. This is so different from even when I was a kid in the 80s. I went to a mix of average to below average public shcools, my family was high income. Everyone we were friends with were upper middle income and we all went to the same public schools. I think parents now are inundated with so much information about how poverty creates a negative learning environment etc that they are trying a hell of lot harder than a generation before to get their kids out of public schools. To be fair, I am probably one of those parents. Issues my own parents probably would have ignored, I am overly concerned with. My parents never could have told you a FARMS rate or free lunch percent at any of my public schools (and my mom was a teacher). But I know that for every single choice we are looking at in D. And its very likely that we will end up in a charter.
I think this article was important but we need more information on the increase in school age kids who simply no longer in the public school system. I think for both DC and new orleans at least half of all kids are not in public schools.

Charter schools are public schools, therefore I would imagine that they are included in the 50% poverty analysis. There are plenty of FARMs children in charter. The charter movement was originally designed with them in mind.

They get public funding but more often than not studies actually do not think of them as "public students" and its unclear if that study made that distinction. In DC, when we talk about "public school" students, it very distinctly means kids in DCPS, NOT in charter schools. And in DC I would argue that more high SES families are fleeing to charters which is leaving th poor kids in DCPS. this study may or may not be flawed but they fail to be clear on these issues. Basis research 101.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The headline at the post is a fuck up. If you read the report, 51% are eligible for free or reduced meals, which kicks in at 185% of the federal poverty level. I don't think this reality should change anyone's response as to the necessity of better supporting poor families, but I hate sloppy reporting like that.

sorry to sound so stupid, but what does that mean about how many FARMS eligible kids are actually now in public schools in the US

And I would really like to know whether they considered charter schools public schools. Sloppy reporting is so right.

Actually, it wasn't sloppy reporting at all. It was no reporting. It was just regurgitating the press release of a "study" done by an advocacy group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think its important to remember this is about poverty for kids enrolled in PUBLIC SCHOOLS. thats not the same as sayiing 50% of ALL kids in US live in poverty. I don't know the second number but I would assume its less than 50%. I think part of this number is a reflection of more and more parents putting their kids in private, charter and home school. bascially you are seeing a pheonomenom where parents who do have a choice, choose to leave public schools. They may also live in poverty but for whatever reason of ability, have pulled their kids out. This is so different from even when I was a kid in the 80s. I went to a mix of average to below average public shcools, my family was high income. Everyone we were friends with were upper middle income and we all went to the same public schools. I think parents now are inundated with so much information about how poverty creates a negative learning environment etc that they are trying a hell of lot harder than a generation before to get their kids out of public schools. To be fair, I am probably one of those parents. Issues my own parents probably would have ignored, I am overly concerned with. My parents never could have told you a FARMS rate or free lunch percent at any of my public schools (and my mom was a teacher). But I know that for every single choice we are looking at in D. And its very likely that we will end up in a charter.
I think this article was important but we need more information on the increase in school age kids who simply no longer in the public school system. I think for both DC and new orleans at least half of all kids are not in public schools.

Charter schools are public schools, therefore I would imagine that they are included in the 50% poverty analysis. There are plenty of FARMs children in charter. The charter movement was originally designed with them in mind.

They get public funding but more often than not studies actually do not think of them as "public students" and its unclear if that study made that distinction. In DC, when we talk about "public school" students, it very distinctly means kids in DCPS, NOT in charter schools. And in DC I would argue that more high SES families are fleeing to charters which is leaving th poor kids in DCPS. this study may or may not be flawed but they fail to be clear on these issues. Basis research 101.

Yep, they are public schools and if they were omitted, then it's a pretty big oversight. Granted, it might not be as big of an oversight where charters constitute a far smaller percentage of public schools as compared to the case in DC, but it's an oversight nonetheless. Any study of "public school students" SHOULD include charters - if anyone wants to make a distinction between public and public charter, then that should be an additional breakout within the study, but if they are being omitted outright, then I'd say the study is definitely flawed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think its important to remember this is about poverty for kids enrolled in PUBLIC SCHOOLS. thats not the same as sayiing 50% of ALL kids in US live in poverty. I don't know the second number but I would assume its less than 50%. I think part of this number is a reflection of more and more parents putting their kids in private, charter and home school. bascially you are seeing a pheonomenom where parents who do have a choice, choose to leave public schools. They may also live in poverty but for whatever reason of ability, have pulled their kids out. This is so different from even when I was a kid in the 80s. I went to a mix of average to below average public shcools, my family was high income. Everyone we were friends with were upper middle income and we all went to the same public schools. I think parents now are inundated with so much information about how poverty creates a negative learning environment etc that they are trying a hell of lot harder than a generation before to get their kids out of public schools. To be fair, I am probably one of those parents. Issues my own parents probably would have ignored, I am overly concerned with. My parents never could have told you a FARMS rate or free lunch percent at any of my public schools (and my mom was a teacher). But I know that for every single choice we are looking at in D. And its very likely that we will end up in a charter.
I think this article was important but we need more information on the increase in school age kids who simply no longer in the public school system. I think for both DC and new orleans at least half of all kids are not in public schools.

Charter schools are public schools, therefore I would imagine that they are included in the 50% poverty analysis. There are plenty of FARMs children in charter. The charter movement was originally designed with them in mind.

I wondered when someone would point this out. Thank you.

PP's mom probably knew which of her students were on assistance. She just assumed it was her job to teach them. Later generations are much more class and SES-conscious, which is why public school systems like DCPS will never see the rebirth some would like to predict. The same types that blather about walkability will move to Bethesda in a heartbeat or go private rather than send their snowflakes to a high-FARMS school.

[Anonymous]

The general public may be confused by charter schools, but local stye and federal government is not. It is completely known in the Government that charter schools are public schools, run with public money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think its important to remember this is about poverty for kids enrolled in PUBLIC SCHOOLS. thats not the same as sayiing 50% of ALL kids in US live in poverty. I don't know the second number but I would assume its less than 50%. I think part of this number is a reflection of more and more parents putting their kids in private, charter and home school. bascially you are seeing a pheonomenom where parents who do have a choice, choose to leave public schools. They may also live in poverty but for whatever reason of ability, have pulled their kids out. This is so different from even when I was a kid in the 80s. I went to a mix of average to below average public shcools, my family was high income. Everyone we were friends with were upper middle income and we all went to the same public schools. I think parents now are inundated with so much information about how poverty creates a negative learning environment etc that they are trying a hell of lot harder than a generation before to get their kids out of public schools. To be fair, I am probably one of those parents. Issues my own parents probably would have ignored, I am overly concerned with. My parents never could have told you a FARMS rate or free lunch percent at any of my public schools (and my mom was a teacher). But I know that for every single choice we are looking at in D. And its very likely that we will end up in a charter.
I think this article was important but we need more information on the increase in school age kids who simply no longer in the public school system. I think for both DC and new orleans at least half of all kids are not in public schools.

Charter schools are public schools, therefore I would imagine that they are included in the 50% poverty analysis. There are plenty of FARMs children in charter. The charter movement was originally designed with them in mind.

They get public funding but more often than not studies actually do not think of them as "public students" and its unclear if that study made that distinction. In DC, when we talk about "public school" students, it very distinctly means kids in DCPS, NOT in charter schools. And in DC I would argue that more high SES families are fleeing to charters which is leaving th poor kids in DCPS. this study may or may not be flawed but they fail to be clear on these issues. Basis research 101.

Only in your mind. they are public charter schools, plain and simple. don't know where you've been but it's very well known in DC that charters are a form of public school and every report makes it clear if the subject is all public schools or if it distinguishes between public charter or traditional public schools.

[Anonymous]

I think they are public students if taxpayer money pays for the education and it is not private school. That is a fairly clear distinction.

[Anonymous]

If DC considers them the same students, then why is there so much fucking belly aching from elected officials about how almost 50% of DC kids are NOT in the DCPS and in fact in charter schools? We are reaching some tipping point that anti charter schools folks keep crying about. So while charters are publicly funded, DC makes very very clear distinction between DCPS and Charter schools. Different websites, different sties for information, different everything . Unless this study is very clear, I would not assume that it includes charter kids. Again, its sloppy research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, if there is no such thing as IQ, and it's all a blank slate, and anyone can be taught anything, who else ya gonna blame but the teachers when they fail to teach?

and no such thing as the effects of poverty, either, right? That's now DCPS has been operating. They acknowledge poverty -- they say the care deeply about it and have found the solution for it -- highly effective teachers who "believe" that that all children can learn despite their circumstances.

Their own data has shown this hasn't worked - and earlier data did not indicate it would, as academy achievement has always been tied to SES as long as it's been measured. Still, they continue.

What's that definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting something different to happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If DC considers them the same students, then why is there so much fucking belly aching from elected officials about how almost 50% of DC kids are NOT in the DCPS and in fact in charter schools? We are reaching some tipping point that anti charter schools folks keep crying about. So while charters are publicly funded, DC makes very very clear distinction between DCPS and Charter schools. Different websites, different sties for information, different everything . Unless this study is very clear, I would not assume that it includes charter kids. Again, its sloppy research.

Individual schools have different websites, but the data is collected in the same place by the Deputy Mayor for education.

Besides this study is a national study, so please consider that the people who conducted it know more about public schools than you do.

Some 'Public officials" bellyache about charter schools and some do not -- depends on their views and what is perceived to benefit different groups of taxpayers. I suggest you educate yourself more on charters instead of spreading incorrect information and blaming others for being sloppy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If DC considers them the same students, then why is there so much fucking belly aching from elected officials about how almost 50% of DC kids are NOT in the DCPS and in fact in charter schools? We are reaching some tipping point that anti charter schools folks keep crying about. So while charters are publicly funded, DC makes very very clear distinction between DCPS and Charter schools. Different websites, different sties for information, different everything . Unless this study is very clear, I would not assume that it includes charter kids. Again, its sloppy research.

Individual schools have different websites, but the data is collected in the same place by the Deputy Mayor for education.

Besides this study is a national study, so please consider that the people who conducted it know more about public schools than you do.

If there is one thing you should know living in DC about studies done by "advocacy groups" it is that they will do things like deliberately not include charter school students to make their point and bury that information deep in a footnote or reveal it only in direct response to a question by a reporter concerning an article that said reporter already intends to publish critiquing the methodology of the study (or the lack of transparency about the methodology).

Don't ever assume that while "the people who conducted the study know more about public schools than you do" may be true, that they did not deliberately ignore or omit large sections of populations that don't further their agenda. like charter schools. Although I wonder if they included New Orleans - but post Katrina it is such an outlier I could see a valid reason NOT to include it because it would skew the study results

I hope you are not as naive as you sound, I fear that you are and hope no one else thinks the way you do............. trust in the powers that be and advocacy groups that conduct studies not to be biased? Who are you trying to kid here? Hope no one but yourself. This kind of sheep like thinking really scares me

Some 'Public officials" bellyache about charter schools and some do not -- depends on their views and what is perceived to benefit different groups of taxpayers. I suggest you educate yourself more on charters instead of spreading incorrect information and blaming others for being sloppy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If DC considers them the same students, then why is there so much fucking belly aching from elected officials about how almost 50% of DC kids are NOT in the DCPS and in fact in charter schools? We are reaching some tipping point that anti charter schools folks keep crying about. So while charters are publicly funded, DC makes very very clear distinction between DCPS and Charter schools. Different websites, different sties for information, different everything . Unless this study is very clear, I would not assume that it includes charter kids. Again, its sloppy research.

Individual schools have different websites, but the data is collected in the same place by the Deputy Mayor for education.

Besides this study is a national study, so please consider that the people who conducted it know more about public schools than you do.

If there is one thing you should know living in DC about studies done by "advocacy groups" it is that they will do things like deliberately not include charter school students to make their point and bury that information deep in a footnote or reveal it only in direct response to a question by a reporter concerning an article that said reporter already intends to publish critiquing the methodology of the study (or the lack of transparency about the methodology).

Don't ever assume that while "the people who conducted the study know more about public schools than you do" may be true, that they did not deliberately ignore or omit large sections of populations that don't further their agenda. like charter schools. Although I wonder if they included New Orleans - but post Katrina it is such an outlier I could see a valid reason NOT to include it because it would skew the study results

I hope you are not as naive as you sound, I fear that you are and hope no one else thinks the way you do............. trust in the powers that be and advocacy groups that conduct studies not to be biased? Who are you trying to kid here? Hope no one but yourself. This kind of sheep like thinking really scares me

Some 'Public officials" bellyache about charter schools and some do not -- depends on their views and what is perceived to benefit different groups of taxpayers. I suggest you educate yourself more on charters instead of spreading incorrect information and blaming others for being sloppy.

Don't assume that they did, either, based on your own lack of knowledge. Even if charter schools were not included, they make up a small part of the public schools in the nation and would not affect the outcome much, if at all. The (many) charter schools here in DC certainly have their share of kids in poverty, as do the charters in New Orleans, where most public schools are charter, since Katrina.

I am not one to trust simply based on the power of the information provider. I obviously know more about Charter schools than you do and wish you were more interested in correcting your mistake than speculating about the deficiency of someone else's thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the result of 30 years of Republican supply-side economic theory and trickle-down policy. The rich have gotten richer, and the American middle class has been decimated. 30 years of empirical evidence shows that supply-side and trickle-down are a monumental economic failure on a national scale. It's resulted in stagnant economic growth, stagnant wages, and a whole host of other issues. That needs to change. Consumption is good, consumption drives economic activity. The more that money is changing hands, the more powerful an economy becomes. Our problem is that most of the money is being concentrated in the rarefied atmosphere of the ultra-wealthy, where it changes hands far less often, and where it touches far less of our everyday economy, which has resulted in economic stagnation.

This!

+1

Few Americans want to admit they've been on "mark" side of a 30 year "long con."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they do a study to determine whether the spike is due to undocumented immigration or if the threshold to qualify for services is lower than in the past?

It has more to do withe evisceration of the middle class and growth of the wealth gap.

no I think it has to do with poorer people having more kids and richer people having less (or none). Wealth just isn't handed down as much because the wealthy don't have as many kids to divide it.

Read that wealthy parents focus more on their DC's education because they believe that is the best way to pass down generational wealth. And they can do this because they have more money to spread among fewer children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If DC considers them the same students, then why is there so much fucking belly aching from elected officials about how almost 50% of DC kids are NOT in the DCPS and in fact in charter schools? We are reaching some tipping point that anti charter schools folks keep crying about. So while charters are publicly funded, DC makes very very clear distinction between DCPS and Charter schools. Different websites, different sties for information, different everything . Unless this study is very clear, I would not assume that it includes charter kids. Again, its sloppy research.

Whether you think the article is flawed because it did not explicitly state charter matters not. Charter schools are public and if you have a child in a D. Charter you are not paying a dime. Their acronym is DCPCS. The P stands for Public. Incidentally, there are still more FARMS children in dcpcs than there are not. Some charters are 99% FARMS