Milwalkee riots

[Thumpalumpacus]

Schools here are funded by property taxes raised in the district they serve. Schools in poverty-stricken areas have less money to work with, because real estate values are lower in their districts compared to wealthier neighborhoods. What that means is that poor folk here get less of precisely the resource they need most to break the cycle of poverty.

And because minorities in America typically make less than whites, that means they live in disproportionately poorer neighborhoods, meaning they receive comparatively poorer educations, meaning they don't have as much access to higher paying jobs, meaning that they live in ...

Yes, I am replying again. Here is a research piece about our secondary school leaving exam which is called a "GCSE." Basically, what you have in a typical secondary modern school are 5 years; 1st to the 5th year. Whatever you have done in the 3rd year will greatly improve your chances (I cannot remember if we needed to pass anything to get into the 4th year, but the 4th year is when the GCSEs start) of getting to a top class. There are three classes normally; the top class, the middle class and then there is the bottom class. Yes, all is fine and dandy, until those dreaded exams come along at the end of the 5th year. You want to pass and you want to pass with flying colours. (I need to get my facts straight on this one) So, whatever you have learned over the two last years, doesn't really enter into it. You could score 100% in all your GCSE exams, and it will not make a blind bit of difference since for each class, the syllabus is completely different in spite of the lessons being the same i.e. basic French from 4th to 5th year, whilst those studying French will be doing something along the lines of translation. Anyway, the best you can hope for is possibly a 'D' which will not get you onto a place for an 'A'-level since you need to have 5 A*-C grades. Basically, you play around in the 3rd year, you have no hope of getting to complete a decent level education because your teacher has already decided what sort of person you are going to be later in life.

http://www.growthmindsetmaths.com/upload...apaper.pdf

Our system here really doesn't have that sort of potential for abuse, because of plentiful junior colleges by which a student who struggled through high school can repair his GPA and prepare himself properly for university. I can see how you'd find your own system a bit obnoxious, but on the other hand I think one good thing to be said for it is that it would seem to encourage accountability.

In stark contrast, here in America a big problem is the escalator effect -- teachers unwilling to hold students back a year because of parental pressure, and school systems (ours are locally-controlled, as you may have gathered from my reply to A Theist) strapped for money not wishing to fall short of national standards nor willing to spend money it might not have on a struggling student simply moving them up through the grades without ensuring that the education has actually been imparted.

Your earlier point about parental involvement is very apt, and I'm sorry I haven't made mention of it before. My ex- and I raised our son in a school district which had above-average (by American standards) ratings, but I've always been of the mind that the most important teachers a child has are his or her parents. I put that ethos into action with my son in many ways small and large -- always talking to him as an adult, reading with him every night I had him (three nights a week, per custody agreement), inculcating the principles of critical thinking. She read to him as well. Jake and I would go hiking or trail-biking, and while so doing would talk about the nature we were observing (which leads, of course, to evolution, astronomy, and all sorts of science, which I'm interested in and somewhat well-versed in; what I didn't know, we'd look up at home).

By the time he was entering high school, he competed for and earnt a spot in a so-called "magnet" school, where the curriculum was much more challenging. Through good grades there, and community service, he recently completed his first year at university without any of us spending a dime (can you tell I'm proud?) And while we weren't penniless, ours was and is a a lower-middle class family. But we had enough money to have the leisure time to pursue the outdoor activities which spark a child's curiosity, enough money to have the Internet at home, enough money so that he could think about those sorts of things rather than where his next meal might come from or would he get beat up for shabby clothes again?

Point being, you're right that parental involvement can make a difference. However, when the parent doesn't have the time for such involvement (working two jobs to make ends meet, which is not uncommon in ghettoes here) or has to work a contrary schedule to keep the job they have, it devolves upon the school district to do something to prevent the installation of a permanent underclass. I think American schools fall short of that. We can do better, and we really have to.

I'd love to see greater federal American investment in education, as opposed to, say, exporting TNT aerially. In my mind, investing in education is very much investing in national security.