Anonymous wrote:Throw students out who don't show up or have no motivation to learn, fire admin who ignores violence and who coerce teachers to fraud the numbers, and for gosh sakes pay teachers more so we can bring respect to our education system.

Throw students out … to go where? Roam the streets and become petty criminals? The public schools are some of the lowest, last ditch places that kids can go to be fed, be under the care of reasonably responsible adults, and maybe learn to read.

Anonymous wrote:Throw students out who don't show up or have no motivation to learn, fire admin who ignores violence and who coerce teachers to fraud the numbers, and for gosh sakes pay teachers more so we can bring respect to our education system.

This. Even one out of the three would go a long way.

Anonymous wrote:Throw students out who don't show up or have no motivation to learn, fire admin who ignores violence and who coerce teachers to fraud the numbers, and for gosh sakes pay teachers more so we can bring respect to our education system.

This would go a long way. It's actually how a lot of charter schools achieve successs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignorant parents that don’t value education or discipline. Money thrown at education won’t fix this. It’s a cultural problem around how education is views and valued. Unless the government sends all babies home with an AI parent to raise them properly from birth to 18, the gap will persist.

That wouldn’t even solve the problem, since at least half of IQ and academic performance is genetic. It’s better that we drop the charade that we can do something about this gap and just focus on letting each kid meet their own potential and graduate school on their way to being a productive member of society. Even if that’s as a farm or construction worker.

Eugenics is not fool proof. That’s what you’re saying although you’re not going as far as claiming blue eyed students are superior. There are plenty of intelligent successful adults who have kids with limited academic abilities and a love of partying.

PP didn't say throw kids away if they don't look like Gwyneth Paltro and Brad Pitt. He/She is saying provide each child with the curricula and support they need to be productive, and if the percentage of ethnicities across professions isn't exactly the same, don't pretend you can force it to be so.

The most effective is $ spent on early programs. Universal pre-k starting at 3. Play based in English until 4. Then some initial academics like abcs to be fully K ready. Smaller classes k-5. Like 15 kids max. It won't happen as that's a LOT of money and space needed. You can't have the school system be responsible for fixing poverty, ignorance and family illiteracy and non focus on academic achievement. But you can get kids early into another environment for much of their week and give them all the opportunity to excel. School only controls the opportunity not the outcome, that's in the student and parents.

Throw students out who don't show up or have no motivation to learn, fire admin who ignores violence and who coerce teachers to fraud the numbers, and for gosh sakes pay teachers more so we can bring respect to our education system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignorant parents that don’t value education or discipline. Money thrown at education won’t fix this. It’s a cultural problem around how education is views and valued. Unless the government sends all babies home with an AI parent to raise them properly from birth to 18, the gap will persist.

That wouldn’t even solve the problem, since at least half of IQ and academic performance is genetic. It’s better that we drop the charade that we can do something about this gap and just focus on letting each kid meet their own potential and graduate school on their way to being a productive member of society. Even if that’s as a farm or construction worker.

As a parent and longtime educator, I agree. Don’t let anyone tell you that acknowledging this fact is “eugenics.” Much of intelligence is inherited (regardless of what race you are — this is NOT a racial argument). We are banging our heads against the wall if we’re trying to achieve the same academic results with every child. Of course we provide equality of opportunity. But there will never be equality of outcomes among all children.

But intelligence is only a small factor in academic success. Anyone with an average IQ should be able be successful in school. It isn’t that challenging. The main problem is attitude, discipline, and work ethic. Apathy is a HUGE problem and starts in elementary school. So many kids just don’t care about school- and neither do their parents. They won’t pay attention in class, won’t listen, won’t do homework, won’t turn in assignments, come late, leave early- they just DGAF and neither do their parents

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignorant parents that don’t value education or discipline. Money thrown at education won’t fix this. It’s a cultural problem around how education is views and valued. Unless the government sends all babies home with an AI parent to raise them properly from birth to 18, the gap will persist.

That wouldn’t even solve the problem, since at least half of IQ and academic performance is genetic. It’s better that we drop the charade that we can do something about this gap and just focus on letting each kid meet their own potential and graduate school on their way to being a productive member of society. Even if that’s as a farm or construction worker.

As a parent and longtime educator, I agree. Don’t let anyone tell you that acknowledging this fact is “eugenics.” Much of intelligence is inherited (regardless of what race you are — this is NOT a racial argument). We are banging our heads against the wall if we’re trying to achieve the same academic results with every child. Of course we provide equality of opportunity. But there will never be equality of outcomes among all children.

Tough question that definitely doesn't have a simple answer.

I think key factors are: school & community culture, expectations, strong foundations, access to essential resources, and personal attitude/priority towards education.

While kids are young, they are still forming a work ethic & an attitude towards whether to prioritize school. Kids may or may not get such an attitude from their home environment, so it seems important to surround as many kids as possible with a school environment that tells them that education is important, adults in the school community believe in the students' potential, adults in the school community will help any student who asks for assistance and puts in the effort, and that being a hard-working student is socially accepted & valued.

Schools that are diverse in terms of looks, cultures, and socioeconomic factors are probably helpful in this regard because it is common in numerous subcultures of American society to value education & expect students to do well, so kids who don't get that from home are likely to be exposed to such attitudes from peers & school staff.

I would like to see elementary schools focus on basic foundations of academics such as:
phonics-based reading instruction in grades k-3, reading & analysis of whole books of gradually increasing length/complexity in grades 1-6;
English/language arts class including direct instruction in grammar, spelling, sentence structure, organization of a paragraph with a topic sentence & supporting details, and by the upper grades introduction to a very basic three to five paragraph structured paper;
Math instruction focused on developing numeracy, understanding of how and why the four basic mathematical operations function, sufficient drill to master math facts through the 10s or 12s, an understanding of how to calculate percentages, how to work with decimals and place value, understanding of measurements, and comfort working with fractions.

Science & social studies/history are in my opinion less critical subjects in the early elementary years but have become so controversial recently that I would like to see schools develop curricula for these subjects after open and robust dialog with the local community.

In my humble and controversial opinion, schools should reduce their use of technology such as computers & internet-based learning in favor of physical textbooks, workbooks, worksheets, and class sets of novels etc. Not all students have equal access to computers, tablets, internet, permission/ability to charge electronic devices, etc., but physical materials are somewhat easier to use in a range of living environments.

Most importantly, I think schools should move back towards having and enforcing standards for student behavior to improve the classroom learning environment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ignorant parents that don’t value education or discipline. Money thrown at education won’t fix this. It’s a cultural problem around how education is views and valued. Unless the government sends all babies home with an AI parent to raise them properly from birth to 18, the gap will persist.

That wouldn’t even solve the problem, since at least half of IQ and academic performance is genetic. It’s better that we drop the charade that we can do something about this gap and just focus on letting each kid meet their own potential and graduate school on their way to being a productive member of society. Even if that’s as a farm or construction worker.

Eugenics is not fool proof. That’s what you’re saying although you’re not going as far as claiming blue eyed students are superior. There are plenty of intelligent successful adults who have kids with limited academic abilities and a love of partying.

Anonymous wrote:Ignorant parents that don’t value education or discipline. Money thrown at education won’t fix this. It’s a cultural problem around how education is views and valued. Unless the government sends all babies home with an AI parent to raise them properly from birth to 18, the gap will persist.

That wouldn’t even solve the problem, since at least half of IQ and academic performance is genetic. It’s better that we drop the charade that we can do something about this gap and just focus on letting each kid meet their own potential and graduate school on their way to being a productive member of society. Even if that’s as a farm or construction worker.

Anonymous wrote:There are public schools where there are significant achievement gaps between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds. Yet some schools thrive despite having great economic differences among the student body - these schools show no significant achievement differences in math, science, social science, and language arts. What are the schools that have no gap doing right? Do these schools provide after-school tutoring, supplemental weekend and summer enrichment? Do these schools provide parents with the resources to supplement their kids or are systemic issues permanent barriers in schools that cannot overcome the gaps (such as parents not having sufficient time because they work in the evenings and nights and needs to sleep during the day)?

Won’t like this answer but it depends on the make-up of the school population. If the kids come from backgrounds that believe education is the path to prosperity you can achieve a lot.

If the kids parent’s don’t value education you won’t be able to overcome the disruptive atmosphere caused by the kids that don’t want to be in school.

Anonymous wrote:Ignorant parents that don’t value education or discipline. Money thrown at education won’t fix this. It’s a cultural problem around how education is views and valued. Unless the government sends all babies home with an AI parent to raise them properly from birth to 18, the gap will persist.

+1. This is the answer. Throwing money, increasing diversity or whatever BS is not going to change this. It hasn’t so far and barely moved the needle.

Ignorant parents that don’t value education or discipline. Money thrown at education won’t fix this. It’s a cultural problem around how education is views and valued. Unless the government sends all babies home with an AI parent to raise them properly from birth to 18, the gap will persist.

Anonymous wrote:It's true that integrated/socio-economically diverse schools bring up test scores for disadvantaged students in a way that more funding thrown at hypersegregated schools doesn't. But the gap doesn't disappear.

I am a strong believer in encouraging school systems to reduce pockets of segregation. They can incentivize going to school out of zone through specialty programs (transportation must be provided or else this is just a way to further advantage already advantaged people). "Minority to majority" transfer programs (giving preference via an otherwise blind lottery for students who would be a minority at the school they're applying to) can also help. And of course, encouraging people to consider their local schools if they are being overlooked due to "test scores" (which is usually code for "I don't think enough people like me go to this school").

To answer your original question, it seems from research that it is simply having that diversity of economic conditions in a school that makes the difference. We can imagine why, certainly . . . compare two schools that pay teachers the same, but one is hypersegregated and pulls almost entirely from a public housing court, whereas another has students in public housing all the way up to students with second homes. A teacher is just one person . . . how much can they accomplish in the hypersegregated classroom, versus how much in a classroom where students who haven't had any advantages are only a fraction and there are parent volunteers and PTA money for extras?

Of course, I want us to pay teachers more, fund schools better, etc. But I also believe that diverse schools are good for all of us, and I'm happy to send my kids to them. No child should be attending a Jim Crow school in 2022.

Would you want to send your proficient or advanced child to a school where 15% of kids are testing at grade level proficiency?