Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxtex
^^^im not really a well versed in modern, urban school issues but aren't many districts funded through property taxes? and if a district had a lot of tax liability or delinquencies, that seems like it would directly affect the quality of education given. im not saying the qualifications of the teachers is lowered, or even the academic potential of the student is, buuuut, their resources are possibly diminished in poor neighborhoods. does city government pick up the slack then? id probably agree with his original claim that most schools are in good shape, but most American don't live in poverty either. the national poverty rate is what, 14%? . if a school district had 60 percent of their household in poverty, id bargain that school is probably not cranking out the valedictorians. context totally matters in this case.
|
First, it's a myth that all urban schools are underfunded. It's certainly true in some states, but a lot of states provide pretty significant support to lower-income districts, to the point that funding per capita in the urban districts might be higher than in many mid-performing suburban districts.
Of course, urban schools can have higher expenses for a number of reasons. They tend to have older schools, and sometimes too many school buildings, which leads to high maintenance costs. If they're in a state where the school district is on the hook for pensions, they'll have higher pension costs, as their total workforce has likely shrunk over time, leaving the system top heavy with retirees. They may have additional costs related to learning disabilities and security a suburban school wouldn't have to address.
Still, studies have looked at the question of how funding affects school performance. The answer is basically it doesn't, unless you only track funding from local sources, which is a proxy for socio-economic status. Pouring additional state and federal aid into schools does nothing to improve performance.
Whether a school has only 5% of the population or over 60% of the student body below the poverty line most likely matters not one whit for the outcome for your child. If your child is below the poverty line - either in the rich school or the poor one - you're about equally likely to fail. Conversely, you're equally likely to succeed if you're not poor no matter where you are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChargerCarl
The main benefit of keeping your kid out of inner city public schools is protecting them from violence.
|
Yeah, I'm not saying parents should send their kids to the worst possible school in a city or anything. But if you're thinking about the hypothetical child of two parents with graduate degrees (like, say my children) there is really no difference whether they go to a great school or a mediocre one. They're going to be smart, average, or dull based upon factors other than the school they go to.