Spin wrote:Money is not the root of this problem.
No, the money is not the problem, at a lot of places.
But you walk through Hudson High School or Perry High School and then walk through Buchtel High School or James Rhodes High School and then tell me there's not a problem with how the schools are funded.
You need to see some of these buildings. The books they have. Poorly lit. Some are still heated by coal. In some, the only electric in some of the rooms is brought in by an extension cord because the water ruined the wiring. Plaster falling down on the kids. Having to walk through several inches of water to go from room to room. There are schools you wouldn't feel safe walking through.
If you don't believe me, go find out for yourself. visit an inner-city school, or a rural school in a depressed area. It'll make you sick that this is the best we can do for American kids. The people who will be taking care of us someday.
And what are America's richest schools and private schools getting for the money? America is failing to produce students that measure up globally. The top 5% of American students can be matched with the top 50% of Japanese students. A bankrupt and struggling Russia has over 5 million people studying calculus, America 500,000.
As far as the inner city goes, I've been thru many of the schools (Practicum in East Cleveland's Chambers Elementary). The building situation I'll address in a minute, but the conditions in the inner city pale in comparison to the main reason they lag behind - Nobody gives a shit. Horrible parents, lack of parents - this is what REALLY matters. And, mis-management of funds in a place like Cleveland Public schools is why the conditions suffer. More than enough money was there to be successful. Again, in reference to my last post- America leads in one category - the amount spent per student. This includes the inner city.
Or, let's think about it this way (I'm assuming you have an education background) I'll take 30 kids who's parents care about their education. Who show up to the conferences. Who are active in the students education such as homework and projects. Who pick up the report card. Who care enough to disclipline their student so they know right from wrong BEFORE they enter the classroom. (These are no great feats by the way, you just have to care) I'll take these kids to the coal-warmed building. The one with water logged books and lack of supplies. Someone else can take 30 kids to Perry School's nicest room. Their parents won't show up to conferences, they are uninterested in what their kid is doing, they don't inquire about homework. They have no interest in who you, their teacher is, and many are still children themselves.
At the end of the year who do you think will advance more educationally?
The life expectancy rate is much lower in the inner city as well. It has nothing to do with money, it has everything to do with NON-SENSE.
As far as school buildings nationwide, there probably isn't a worse use of infrastructure in the nation. These bulidings sit unused so many hours of the day and part of the year. Long ago other uses should have been employed such as before and after hour day care, routine medical clinics, adult literacy teaching. Year round school, among other advantages would also keep the bulidings in use.
So, money isn't helping EDUCATION in the wealthier districts and it's not hurting the inner city nearly as much as we've been hoodwinked into believing. There are several nations, poorer than the U.S. that are doing far more with much less. This is fact.