Vegas » Yesterday, 3:18 pm » wrote: ↑
As some may be aware, I have a strong dedication to education. I have always maintained that there cannot possibly be a negative effect on creating an educated populace. This is a good article on why poor students underperform in school. It isn't because they are stupid. Kids from poor families don't have the basic needs taken care of such as food, shelter, clothes, and parental involvement. How does a child learn when they are hungry? They may eat a **** meal at school, and that is it for the rest of the day.
Here is what the research found:
- Poor families who received an extra $3000 in government assistance had a significant increase in test scores vs those who did not receive assistance.
- There is no lack of data that shows a strong correlation between poverty and low educational performance.
A counter argument states that America spends more money per student than most any other nation on Earth, yet we still have poor performance with respect to the rest of the developed world.
My response is that the money is not being allotted correctly. The money spent is used for books, teacher salaries, building costs, etc...It doesn't address the root cause, which is poverty.
My solution is to follow the overwhelming research. Provide money to impoverished families so they can at least have three meals a day, a decent apartment/home, and the basic needs.
With all due respect to your very valid points, I've really got to ask how it is that those poor who you refer to that send their kids to school hungry, are either not taking advantage of the federal food stamp program, or are simply not spending it for it's intended purposes for their children. I refuse to believe that those recipients can't afford to spend a couple of bucks a day of that welfare money to give their kid a couple of eggs and toast for breakfast, and a tuna sandwich for lunch. This isn't and should not be the responsibility of the schools, nor should the hard-working taxpayer be forced to pay for those meals twice, first for the food stamp fund and later to pay a stipend to the school.
Before I'd ask taxpayers to spend another $3000 per family, I'd want to see why their parents are not taking their responsibility seriously, and not simply cover up their abuse of that welfare they're already getting. And one more thing. Before sending another nickel their way, they should be required to take a drug test, just to confirm that this is not where their welfare money is going. Why shouldn't those taking welfare fall under the same criteria as those required to take a drug test prior to getting hired for a job? How is it that one is perfectly acceptable, and the other is an inhumane and unfair requirement steeped in racism that causes such great humiliation?
Do you find that so unreasonable?