Anonymous
Post 02/05/2014 10:58     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:21:15 - what you still fail to understand is that as long as there is a critical mass of people who grew up in that paradigm of abuse and family violence, community violence, absent parents, or parents with problems (drug addiction, mental health) - that modeling will never happen, and in fact will carry over to those who didn't grow up with it.

"Normal" is a function of critical mass. In a 99% FARMS school, "normal" means dysfunction, abuse, violence, et cetera. Putting 20% high-SES students into a 99% FARMS school will not solve anything for the FARMS students, and will probably only impose negative modeling on the high-SES students.

The only way it will work is to change those numbers around, to where it's less than 20% who came up from those broken and dysfunctional homes, and where the critical mass is instead on those who can provide that positive modeling. And even then, it can be challenging, as groups will be likely to self-segregate.

Magical thinking about modeling simply won't cut it.


I'm the PP you're addressing - what "magical thinking about modeling" are you referring to? My post was solely in response to the "When will these failing students and their parents wake up and take responsibility" statements. I made no comment on how to fix it. What magical thinking are you talking about??


Funny, since your entire second paragraph was all about the lack of positive modeling, PP.


Even funnier that you missed that it's all about how parents and other stable adults in a child's life model it, NOT modelling it in school. Also about the difficulty of "figuring out for yourself" these things without modelling. Again though, NOT talking about modelling in a school. You missed that before, do you get it now? So please save your snark, there is nothing "magical" about saying that breaking cycles of generational abuse, neglect, educational failure, and untreated mental illness almost always require interventions and supports from OUTSIDE the family. Also nothing magical about understanding that making the difference in a single child's life who is growing up in these circumstances almost always requires at least one healthy, stable adult modelling - yes, I said MODELLING - how to handle their choices and and how to maintain a vision for where they are trying to get their lives too while every moment of every day they are surrounded with a different reality and overwhelming different modelling.

You missed that that was what I was saying before. Do you get it now? It's not magical, it's basically one of the basic tenets of social work and what no respectable social scientist would dispute.
Anonymous
Post 02/05/2014 10:34     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:^ And... if the rest of us have to be personally responsible, it's not right for others to get a pass. Most of us are not members of the 1%, most of us did not have wealth, advantage and privilege fall into our laps. Maybe we have a decent job, maybe a decent place to live - but we had to work damn hard for it. We had to save for it. We had to plan for it. We had to make choices for it. We had to sacrifice for it. We made our share of struggles and mistakes getting here. But, we tried. And after all those struggles, trials and tribulations in getting here, it is deeply offensive and insulting to have people trivialize all of that, to suggest that it was advantage, privilege, unlevel playing field, different starting point, all kinds of judgement when in fact many of us did come from poor, dysfunctional, alcoholic/drug-dependent, abusive, single-parent households ourselves. It's a slap in the face to suggest anything was handed to us. And it's also a slap in the face, after all we went through, to then turn around and suggest anyone else should just get a pass and shouldn't really have to try, shouldn't be held responsible - when we ourselves did try and we did hold ourselves responsible. It's frankly deeply insulting.


Give me a freakin' break. Where do I say people from the most challenged backgrounds get a pass? Where do I say those of us who are surviving didn't work for it? And are you even responding to my actual post? You're saying I said that those who came from dysfunctional, alcholhol/drug-dependent abusive households had something handed to them? What planet are you on? I'm the one who pointed out that my mom died when I was 16 and I commuted 2+ hrs to school each day, and it was because my family worked HARD to get me into the school and instill the value to go. What part of that is having something "handed" to me? Read what you are responding to before you have a freaking cow in your response. You are responding to things I simply didn't say and you are apparently incapable of understanding the message I WAS trying to deliver.

For the rest of you: you simply have to ask yourself whether you are interested in seeing all kids get the supports they need for a shot at a good education, or you are only interested in seeing your kid succeed. Raising kids is the hardest work any of us will ever do. Many can't or don't or won't go the extra mile to look at the bigger problems. But if you ARE someone who holds the value that work needs to be done (regardless of who you think needs to do it) to improve the situation so that ALL kids are supported in having a realistic shot at a good education, then you have to accept, recognize, and deal with the fact that once a child is born into a difficult situation, IT IS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT to work one's way out. Standing on the sidelines and yelling at people "Be responsible! Try harder! Do better! Raise your kids better! Don't let the gangs in your neighborhood shoot your kids or recruit your kids!" Yeah, how is all that yelling working for the families that are plagued by these issues? It's like trying to get a child to do something by just yelling at the child to do it, not showing them daily, with nurturing, how to do it. How does yelling and cutting kids off from supports work for improving how they act and grow up? Exactly, it doesn't work, it screwes kids up. Standing on the side demanding more responsibility and better parenting has never, and will never, actually improve parenting. And the kids suffer, and then they grow into adults who have kids who still don't know how to do any better.

Standing on the sidelines and demanding that everyone do their share and if they don't, tough shit, is guaranteed to cut off and disadvantage and further plunge the most at risk and vulnerable kids into further generational poverty, abuse, mental health problems, substance abuse, and violence. This is one of THE most evidence-based facts in the world. Schools are not able nor should they be tasked with SOLVING all of these bigger social problems. BUT... if schools are to effectively education all kids, schoools need to have resources redistributed in order to support the kids and the teachers and engage the parents while the kids are in the building so they can actually learn while they are in the buidling. (As stated elsewhere, the resources needed are mostly social workers, behavior and discipline specialists, and staff to can engage the parents when the kids are struggling badly or not coming to school. Enageage doesn't mean sending a letter and waiting to see if the parent responds. It means calling and asking the parentt to come in, and if no response and things ares till bad, doing a home visit. The goal of all that is to see what the problme is and figure out whether the school has access to any external resources that will address the problem so the kid can come back or do better while they're in the building. That may sound simple, but it's almost impossible without the staff to do it.

None of my posts are commenting on the "increasing economic diversity" proposal that this thread is mainly about. It is just to point out to people who say "Parents should take responsibility" yes, they should. Gues what? A lot of them don't or are incapable of it (due to mental health or so much PTSD they don't function) and guess what else? THEYIR KIDS NEED HELP. Not providing that help guarantees more problems. It's not because anyone's getting a pass, it's ebcause that is the nature of generational abuse, PTSD, mental untreated mental illness, and disabilities that aren't addressed.

I never said those who didn't come from abusive households didn't work for what they have, and I never said anyone gets a "pass". And frankly, once again, the fact that you obviously DID NOT grow up in these kinds of households is evident (talking to the PP who just totally responded to a post she dreamed up and not what I actually wrote) because if you knew what kind of living hell it is to grow up in an abusive, neglectful, household or chronically hungry or watching someone beat the crap out of someone else or always fearing for yoru safety every.single.time. you open your door to go out or try to come home... if you knew what kind of hell that was on a daily basis, you'd never call what I'm saying "giving anyone a pass". Being realistic and evidence-based about what it takes to break the cycles of generational substance abuse, abuse and poverty on a macro level means understanding that it has never been enough, and will never be enough, to just look at people failing and say "Do better. Try harder." ALMOST NO ONE DOES BETTER AND TRIES HARDER AND WORKS THEIR WAY OUT OF HORRIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES WITHOUT A ***GUIDE*** AND WITHOUT ***SUPPORT***. I know plenty of people who came from unspeakable rotten backgrounds who are stable, functioning, amazing members of socieity now. Getting out was the hardest work ever, but they did it, band guess wheat? The single most common factor that distinguishes the people who DO make it from the people who DON't make it out is at least ONE - it just takes one - stable, healthy adult presence who is there for the long run as a support. Someone you can go to when you're unsafe, sick, lost... and someone who keeps reminding you there is another way. I've been working with at risk kids for 20 years and I have YET to meet the person who came from hell and worked their way out of it without some model, some support, some guidance about how and where to go.

People like you who refuse to be reaslistic about what it takes to solve these larger societal ills will always be part of the problem, not the solution, because you have no idea of how to work on these issues yourself or weigh which policies/politicians/initiatives to support to really move these issues locally. You sit there judging that everyone just has to try harder and no one should get a pass and accusing people of saying you didn't work to be where you are. Get f'in real. No one is saying that and you are really part of the problem in your inability to understand why you have to consider that starting point matters.

I will not be further posting on this because I don't think there's any other way for me to ttry to say what I'm saying.
Anonymous
Post 02/05/2014 09:15     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:For all of you saying that you just have to "avail yourself of education if you are poor." Do you honestly believe that some 60% of kids are not reading at grade level nationwide because their parents are failures. Do you honestly believe if it was just that easy more would not do it? At some point you have to look at where we are and make a decision to improve it by thinking about the situation in a different way. Feeling superiour does nothing but make you annoying.


Not the PP, but YES. I HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT.

It is an ABSOLUTE FACT that there is a broad swath of American culture that does not value education, and many who in fact go even further to the point of being staunchly anti-intellectual. It's typically the nerdy kids and bookworms who receive the brunt of teasing, bullying and abuse in schools all across this country. There are many who mistakenly feel school is for losers, and either just want to bumble along through life cluelessly, or who want to gamble away their chance at education and squander their focus on some deluded ideas of shortcuts to stardom, whether athletics, entertainment, crime or some other means - though the reality of that succeeding is even more remote than your likelihood of being struck by lightning, whereas your chances of getting stability and a good career and income are far better if you instead focus on academics.

And lest you feel tempted to spring up in misguided defense of African-American culture (because that's what people here constantly do), you need to drop that and recognize that this isn't a black-vs-white thing either, it happens in broad swaths of white culture as well. This is why we have rednecks and white trailer park trash. All one has to do to see that anti-intellectualism is look at folks like Sarah Palin who pander to that demographic, snarling "elitist" at anyone who has an education, or the folks who insist on putting so-called "science textbooks" in schools saying the world is only 6,000 years old despite the vast body of scientific evidence to the contrary.

It's a cross-cutting societal illness that cuts across multiple demographics and cultures here in the US. People like to talk about Finland's success? Well, a big part of that is that education is actually far more universally recognized as important across Finn culture, their culture is different than ours.
Anonymous
Post 02/05/2014 08:12     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
^^ give me a break. The "underclass" people who clean my house are hard working immigrants, not poorly-educated DCPS high school grads or dropouts. The local "underclass" wouldn't deign to clean houses, because that would be bowing to my gentrified you-know-what. There is a problem with entitlement among the DC poor.
Anonymous
Post 02/05/2014 07:48     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How about coming up with a solution that makes low-income earners better able to earn higher incomes?


No, no, no DC likes to import knowledge. We need to keep DC wage earners dumb and uneducated so they will serve all the smart people with the good jobs.


We already have a solution. It's called "education." Trouble is, you have to avail yourself of it.


I'm talking about opportunities for adult, the city only invests in K-12. Nobody really talks about the folks who do make it successfully through DCPS because I guess then it's a "success story." But this success story is now qualified to work at some some service jobs but even without an AA degree that is increasingly hard to come by. People need bachelors degrees to become cops, work in hotels(beyond cleaning rooms), and many other jobs in the service industry. But in DC, we like to make sure we permanently oppress our underclass so they will always be around to clean the houses for all the DCUM types that come in from elsewhere with their fancy degrees and good jobs. The city has never really taken education seriously, K-12 or otherwise.
Anonymous
Post 02/05/2014 07:38     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
For all of you saying that you just have to "avail yourself of education if you are poor." Do you honestly believe that some 60% of kids are not reading at grade level nationwide because their parents are failures. Do you honestly believe if it was just that easy more would not do it? At some point you have to look at where we are and make a decision to improve it by thinking about the situation in a different way. Feeling superiour does nothing but make you annoying.
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 23:05     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:21:15 - what you still fail to understand is that as long as there is a critical mass of people who grew up in that paradigm of abuse and family violence, community violence, absent parents, or parents with problems (drug addiction, mental health) - that modeling will never happen, and in fact will carry over to those who didn't grow up with it.

"Normal" is a function of critical mass. In a 99% FARMS school, "normal" means dysfunction, abuse, violence, et cetera. Putting 20% high-SES students into a 99% FARMS school will not solve anything for the FARMS students, and will probably only impose negative modeling on the high-SES students.

The only way it will work is to change those numbers around, to where it's less than 20% who came up from those broken and dysfunctional homes, and where the critical mass is instead on those who can provide that positive modeling. And even then, it can be challenging, as groups will be likely to self-segregate.

Magical thinking about modeling simply won't cut it.


I'm the PP you're addressing - what "magical thinking about modeling" are you referring to? My post was solely in response to the "When will these failing students and their parents wake up and take responsibility" statements. I made no comment on how to fix it. What magical thinking are you talking about??


Funny, since your entire second paragraph was all about the lack of positive modeling, PP.
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 22:42     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Making homes/rent more affordable to the middle/low-middle class folks. A shame I teach in DC but can't afford to live there. SMH.
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 22:02     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
^ And... if the rest of us have to be personally responsible, it's not right for others to get a pass. Most of us are not members of the 1%, most of us did not have wealth, advantage and privilege fall into our laps. Maybe we have a decent job, maybe a decent place to live - but we had to work damn hard for it. We had to save for it. We had to plan for it. We had to make choices for it. We had to sacrifice for it. We made our share of struggles and mistakes getting here. But, we tried. And after all those struggles, trials and tribulations in getting here, it is deeply offensive and insulting to have people trivialize all of that, to suggest that it was advantage, privilege, unlevel playing field, different starting point, all kinds of judgement when in fact many of us did come from poor, dysfunctional, alcoholic/drug-dependent, abusive, single-parent households ourselves. It's a slap in the face to suggest anything was handed to us. And it's also a slap in the face, after all we went through, to then turn around and suggest anyone else should just get a pass and shouldn't really have to try, shouldn't be held responsible - when we ourselves did try and we did hold ourselves responsible. It's frankly deeply insulting.
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 21:59     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:21:15 - what you still fail to understand is that as long as there is a critical mass of people who grew up in that paradigm of abuse and family violence, community violence, absent parents, or parents with problems (drug addiction, mental health) - that modeling will never happen, and in fact will carry over to those who didn't grow up with it.

"Normal" is a function of critical mass. In a 99% FARMS school, "normal" means dysfunction, abuse, violence, et cetera. Putting 20% high-SES students into a 99% FARMS school will not solve anything for the FARMS students, and will probably only impose negative modeling on the high-SES students.

The only way it will work is to change those numbers around, to where it's less than 20% who came up from those broken and dysfunctional homes, and where the critical mass is instead on those who can provide that positive modeling. And even then, it can be challenging, as groups will be likely to self-segregate.

Magical thinking about modeling simply won't cut it.


I'm the PP you're addressing - what "magical thinking about modeling" are you referring to? My post was solely in response to the "When will these failing students and their parents wake up and take responsibility" statements. I made no comment on how to fix it. What magical thinking are you talking about??
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 21:54     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
+1. Schools exist to educate, not to fix all the problems in the universe.


Exactly!! That's why i support putting the burden on mixed income housing developments to solve the problem of neighborhoods with high concentrations of poverty. The schools don't have to do anything more than share their data regarding their numbers of FARMS. If below 20%, that neighborhood has a deficiency of low income accessible housing and the neighborhood needs to develop a plan to increase those numbers. Get your Nanny to move her family into your house, have habitat for humanity build a few townhouse, or require new development to set aside a portion for working poor in your neighborhood.


Case in point. You may want to go back to school, since it didn't properly educate you on basic reading comprehension. Get that right first, and then we can talk social justice and affordable housing.
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 21:50     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
21:15 - what you still fail to understand is that as long as there is a critical mass of people who grew up in that paradigm of abuse and family violence, community violence, absent parents, or parents with problems (drug addiction, mental health) - that modeling will never happen, and in fact will carry over to those who didn't grow up with it.

"Normal" is a function of critical mass. In a 99% FARMS school, "normal" means dysfunction, abuse, violence, et cetera. Putting 20% high-SES students into a 99% FARMS school will not solve anything for the FARMS students, and will probably only impose negative modeling on the high-SES students.

The only way it will work is to change those numbers around, to where it's less than 20% who came up from those broken and dysfunctional homes, and where the critical mass is instead on those who can provide that positive modeling. And even then, it can be challenging, as groups will be likely to self-segregate.

Magical thinking about modeling simply won't cut it.
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 21:30     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Nobody's stopping you six-figure crybabies from home-schooling your children.


Nobody is stopping you from attending your neighborhood school.

And I'll let you in on a secret: We are already home-schooling our children. We used to do so full-time when they were toddlers, but now we home-school in the evenings and on weekends. Why do you think our children do so well in school?



This comment is key -- an educator once told me that supplemental education (that is, education at home in addition to the core school hours) correlates strongly with culture. Crudely and generally speaking, white and asian cultures in the U.S. are driven to educate at home because they do NOT expect the school system to do the whole job; whereas other cultures in the U.S. tend to expect "full service" from the school system. I would like to see some more studies on this; but if true it would support the belief that it is culture, not race or strictly speaking SES, that predicts for high academic achievement.


This is news to me and I am an Asian immigrant. I don't know any Asians that "homeschool". All my Asian friends and I got nagged a lot and were told to get good grades but other than that my parents did not help with homework or even read to us. Their English wasn't good anyway. Asians expect their kids to work hard but leave educating to the professionals.


That might be more a reflection of that fact that your parents were not in a position to "homeschool" because they were immigrants. So, they had to settle for nagging.

What are your plans for your kids, PP? Will you teach or will you nag?
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 21:15     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Nobody's stopping you six-figure crybabies from home-schooling your children.


Nobody is stopping you from attending your neighborhood school.

And I'll let you in on a secret: We are already home-schooling our children. We used to do so full-time when they were toddlers, but now we home-school in the evenings and on weekends. Why do you think our children do so well in school?



This comment is key -- an educator once told me that supplemental education (that is, education at home in addition to the core school hours) correlates strongly with culture. Crudely and generally speaking, white and asian cultures in the U.S. are driven to educate at home because they do NOT expect the school system to do the whole job; whereas other cultures in the U.S. tend to expect "full service" from the school system. I would like to see some more studies on this; but if true it would support the belief that it is culture, not race or strictly speaking SES, that predicts for high academic achievement.


+1

Education is a two way street. There are two key verbs in education: Teaching - the part that the teacher helps with, and studying - the part that the student has to do. Ultimately a big piece of the responsibility is on the student to do the learning, and on families to support that learning. But unfortunately a lot of families don't hold up their end of the bargain and abdicate their responsibilities. There's a lot more to success in school than just showing up. Yet, with policies in school that give kids passing grades even when they didn't work for them and didn't deserve them, and when they advance and graduate kids that couldn't be bothered to do the work, it sends a bad message.

And that applies to all other areas of life as well. You have to do your part in order to succeed. Merely showing up but then doing nothing should not entitle anyone to a meal and a roof over their head. The rest of us have to work hard for those things, the rest of us have to be responsible, have to plan, and have to fend for ourselves. The societal safety net is only supposed to be for those who truly have a compelling reason beyond their own control why they cannot support themselves, like the disabled or elderly. Needing support because you were an irresponsible teenager who got knocked up isn't a terribly compelling reason. Needing support because you can't hold down a job and keep getting fired because you can't manage to get yourself out of bed, have a bad attitude and are lazy at work isn't a terribly compelling reason.

We are cynical for a reason. The rest of us in the hard-working middle class are deeply fatigued when we have to witness this kind of thing day in and day out, and when we end up footing the bill for the irresponsibility of others. I have very little tolerance and sympathy for this kind of thing.


What you say is so true and how it SHOULD work. The achilles heel ALWAYS to this "just take goddamn personal responsibility everyone!!" argument is that it would be fair and legitimate if all families started on basically the same starting line, on the same track, in the same race. If ALL parents had personal responsibility, appreciation for the importance of education (or even education as a non-negotiable), supplementing what happens in school at home... and a LACK of environmental stressors (violence, mental illness, neglect) that also totally impeded a PARENT's ability to model these things well, as well as a child's ability to function under the stress... If EVERY family started from the same basic starting line, then y es, the "Just step up and do what you know you're supposed to do for you and your kids" argument would be 100% fair and realistic.

But we all know everyone does not start on the same starting block, or on the same track, or even in the same damn race.

And this isn't a "boo hoo for the unfortunate" post. This is just about being realistic that it is an evidence-based fact that human nature is to model what you had modeled for you. Problem solving, relationships, values... it is MUCH MUCH MUCH HARDER to go against what was modeled for you (botht he good and the bad) than to look around your family and your community and then do something DIFFERENT than everyone you see. Sometimes including your teachers.

My mom died when I was 16 and I moved in with my dad in another state. I communted on public transportation to high school (I guess I was a residency cheat at that point) for 2 1.4 hrs EACH WAY for the remaining 1 1/2 yrs of school. I was exhausted, it sucked... but I was at a good public high school, thats' where all my friends were, and I'd just lost my mom. It was NEVER even a thought for me that I would drop out of school or leave school, I just had to make it work. Was tht because I'm some super special, dedicated, work-oriented human being? No. I had parents who'd drilled into me the importance of education and we'd gone through a lot for me to go to that school, so no way did it occur to me to leave. But that was what was MODELED for me.

PP and others like you, it always seems crystal clear to me that you have little or no exposure to the home lives of hte kids you're judging. I'm not talking poverty specifically, becaues there are plenty of poor families who work their asses off for their kids to get good or great educations, and who supplement however they can and who reinforce with their kids that they WILL finish high school and hopefully college. THat is hardly a unique value to middle and upper class families. But the family and environmental major dysfunctions, violence, substance abuse, neglect, gang violence, awful nutrition... PP did you really make all your "I did my part, why aren't you doing yours?" life decisions after going through those combinations of stressors? Because that is the reality of most of the families and kids who are really failing in school. That, combined with schools in the most stressed neighborhoods usually not having hte best teachers or the best supports that allow teachers to just teach (and not be social workers/discipline specialists).

I'm sorry, it is ignorant and totally unproductive to hold this "Take personal responsibility, that's what everyone else does" view as if everyone had basically the same starting point.

Starting point means everything, and it's so incomprehensibly difficult to go against all those negatives and DREAM UP or IMAGINE "Oh, schools aren't going to give my kid everything educationally that they need, I need to supplement. Hmmmm, I don't know myself a lot of what my kids needs to, so now I will dream up how to supplement my own knowledge while teaching my kid at home. Never mind our worries about where we'll live next week or the older kids who harass me and my kid every time we enter and leave the building."

Get real. If you want to hold everyone to some standard of personal accountability, make sure you are dealing with a level playing field to start with and everyone's on the same field. I'm sure the few things in your life you didn't know or have modeled for you, you didn't appreciate being held accountable in some impossible way for being supposed to have just "figured it out" on your own and done it. This conversation only gets real if we acknowledge that not everyone starts with the same toolbox or the same environment from which to engage as students.


PP here, and I think you are judging with some majorly mistaken preconceptions of your own. As it happens, I was a FARMS student myself, raised by a single mom, we grew up in poverty, a lot of my meals growing up were things like beans, rice and cheap macaroni because that's all we could afford. I did not come from any background of privilege. I did not come from any special starting point. Yet, I made it happen. If I could make it happen then it's possible for anyone else. It's time to stop making all of these empty excuses. The fact that I came from a background of poverty myself is what makes me particularly cynical whenever I hear these things. I tend to think I have a far better idea of what it takes than you do, because I have actually lived it and made it happen.


I know my post was long, but you clearly did not read it. My whole point is that it's not about simply whether you were poor or not. Read it. There are tons of poor families that made it work. In order for you to be coming from the background I'm talking about, you would have been through family violence, community violence, absent parents, or parents with problems (drug addiction, mental health) that made them absent. Or abusive. THOSE are the factors I'm saying impact what is modeled for a child.

Succeeding into stability from poverty is difficult but doable, because you can be poor and still have good role models or people who - even if they couldn't do it - believe in your ability to succeed and encourage you. But if you have NO ONE around you who models stability, going to school, taking school seriously, or getting out of a difficult community, and no one who supports your learning, AND you have the kinds of stressors I'm talking about, AND NO ONE - I mean No one at all - who is a healthy adult pointing you in the right direction... THAT is what I'm talking about. By your own account you didn't come from that. I'm not judging wrong, because your own account proves you're not talking about the background I'm talking about.
Anonymous
Post 02/04/2014 20:38     Subject: how to increase economic diversity in schools.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
+1. Schools exist to educate, not to fix all the problems in the universe.


Exactly!! That's why i support putting the burden on mixed income housing developments to solve the problem of neighborhoods with high concentrations of poverty. The schools don't have to do anything more than share their data regarding their numbers of FARMS. If below 20%, that neighborhood has a deficiency of low income accessible housing and the neighborhood needs to develop a plan to increase those numbers. Get your Nanny to move her family into your house, have habitat for humanity build a few townhouse, or require new development to set aside a portion for working poor in your neighborhood.