Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 112
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by ScaryHumor
    As an inner-city educator, I am very interested in your claims. But I can not find nothing to back your statements.


    You're excuse of being "too lazy" to look it up yourself makes it appear that you are unable provide any credible information. [/color]

    In my opinion, your racist statements are nothing more than divisive sputterings, reminiscent of Al Sharpton.
    Oh, for god's sake, i really have to prove that black students attend more poorly funded schools in the United States than whites? Seriously? We cannot just agree on that and move on? Ok, i just did a google. Here.

    "According to the mainstream Education Trust, a leading establishment Washington DC think-tank, there is a chronic and widespread funding shortfall for U.S. school districts with large numbers of black and Hispanic students. "Thirty-seven out of 48 states," the Trust reports, "provide fewer cost-adjusted dollars (using the [standard] 40 percent cost adjustment for lower-income students) to the districts with the most minority students, with 12 states showing gaps of more than $1000 per student [per year]." In New York, the minority school funding gap is more than $2000.

    This reflects a privilege-preserving school-funding system that bases per-student expenditures largely on the local property tax base – a wonderful U.S. formula that is technically "color-blind" but in fact heavily racialized, thanks to persistent black residential segregation (and discrimination) and persistent huge racial wealth disparities that have deepened considerably since 2001.

    As one black elementary school student asked the prolific author and educational justice witness and spokesman Jonathan Kozol, "why do those who need the most get the least and those who need the least get the most?"


    For me it's enough evidence to step out of my half million dollar house, and drive my SUV across the tracks (literally), from my white suburb, to voulunteer teaching a web development curriculum to inner city, and migrant worker children, who's F grade school's money is being drained by the state, and given to richer better schools.

    But you are right, I am the racist for bringing it up. Me and Al Sharpton.
  2. #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by ScaryHumor
    As an inner-city educator, I am very interested in your claims. But I can not find nothing to back your statements.


    You're excuse of being "too lazy" to look it up yourself makes it appear that you are unable provide any credible information.

    You're kidding right?
  3. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Oh, for god's sake, i really have to prove that black students attend more poorly funded schools in the United States than whites? Seriously? We cannot just agree on that and move on? Ok, i just did a google. Here.

    "According to the mainstream Education Trust, a leading establishment Washington DC think-tank, there is a chronic and widespread funding shortfall for U.S. school districts with large numbers of black and Hispanic students. "Thirty-seven out of 48 states," the Trust reports, "provide fewer cost-adjusted dollars (using the [standard] 40 percent cost adjustment for lower-income students) to the districts with the most minority students, with 12 states showing gaps of more than $1000 per student [per year]." In New York, the minority school funding gap is more than $2000.

    This reflects a privilege-preserving school-funding system that bases per-student expenditures largely on the local property tax base – a wonderful U.S. formula that is technically "color-blind" but in fact heavily racialized, thanks to persistent black residential segregation (and discrimination) and persistent huge racial wealth disparities that have deepened considerably since 2001.

    As one black elementary school student asked the prolific author and educational justice witness and spokesman Jonathan Kozol, "why do those who need the most get the least and those who need the least get the most?"


    For me it's enough evidence to step out of my half million dollar house, and drive my SUV across the tracks (literally), from my white suburb, to voulunteer teaching a web development curriculum to inner city, and migrant worker children, who's F grade school's money is being drained by the state, and given to richer better schools.

    But you are right, I am the racist for bringing it up. Me and Al Sharpton.
    I read the article you cited and while there is some interesting information in it, there is also a lot of spinning of numbers. One paragraph stated that if two districts received similar per student funding, but one had a significantly larger underprivialaged (did not say black kids) population the per student dollars were adjusted and they did not consider them similar after the adjustment. HUH, if you get $300 per student, you get $300 per student, it is similar regardless of population served.

    I could not find anything in the article to support your statement that white kids get 3 times the money for education than black kids. I saw a lot of information discussing underprivalaged, poor, etc. but not black and white.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    ...
    For me it's enough evidence to step out of my half million dollar house, and drive my SUV across the tracks (literally), from my white suburb, to voulunteer teaching a web development curriculum to inner city, and migrant worker children, who's F grade school's money is being drained by the state, and given to richer better schools. ...
    This is an excellent endeavor you have taken on.

    Of course, as long as you commute into the community to assist, rather than live in the community and assist, your tax dollars continue to go to the schools in the suburbs.

    I suspect a trend line would show that the decreases in the property tax based portion of education funding occured proportionately with the migration of educated and well-paid "black" people from their birth communities to the "white suburbs."
  5. #65  
    [QUOTE=shopharim]This is an excellent endeavor you have taken on.

    Of course, as long as you commute into the community to assist, rather than live in the community and assist, your tax dollars continue to go to the schools in the suburbs.

    I suspect a trend line would show that the decreases in the property tax based portion of education funding occured proportionately with the migration of educated and well-paid "black" people from their birth communities to the "white suburbs."[/QUOTE]
    Well.... Why do you suppose that is?
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    I read the article you cited and while there is some interesting information in it, there is also a lot of spinning of numbers. One paragraph stated that if two districts received similar per student funding, but one had a significantly larger underprivialaged (did not say black kids) population the per student dollars were adjusted and they did not consider them similar after the adjustment. HUH, if you get $300 per student, you get $300 per student, it is similar regardless of population served.

    I could not find anything in the article to support your statement that white kids get 3 times the money for education than black kids. I saw a lot of information discussing underprivalaged, poor, etc. but not black and white.
    Of course, the article provided was from a "think tank" and the statistics I provided, although dated, were from government websites. Who is more credible? Well, you decide.
  7. #67  
    "According to the mainstream Education Trust, a leading establishment Washington DC think-tank, there is a chronic and widespread funding shortfall for U.S. school districts with large numbers of black and Hispanic students. "Thirty-seven out of 48 states," the Trust reports, "provide fewer cost-adjusted dollars (using the [standard] 40 percent cost adjustment for lower-income students) to the districts with the most minority students, with 12 states showing gaps of more than $1000 per student [per year]." In New York, the minority school funding gap is more than $2000.
    Let's analize this. The "40 percent cost adjustment" is the formula for the amount of extra funding a state provides school districts based on the percentage of children at poverty level in those districts. This example is from the website cited: if school A has zero percent poverty and gets $10,000 in state funding, then school B which has 100 percent poverty would get $14,000 in state funding. Now, the websites is claiming that "37 of 48 states provide fewer cost adjusted dollars ro districts with mostly minority students".

    What is this saying? Is it saying that students in predominantly minority areas are getting less state funding than students in predominantly white areas? No. Its saying that students in minority areas aren't getting enough extra funding from the state--presumably to offset the lack of property tax income.

    Just wanted to clear that up.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Of course, as long as you commute into the community to assist, rather than live in the community and assist, your tax dollars continue to go to the schools in the suburbs.
    That's exactly the problem. My property tax dollars go toward the wealthy and successfull school, and the properties in some of the projects where i voulunteer fund the poorest, least succesfull students, who actually need the education dollars more. Many of the tax dollars in the Ivey Lane project school district for example are spent on feeding breakfast to the children in the morning, and providing other additional services to the children that are not needed in the wealthier schools, starving the district even more for funds.

    The problem is compounded by the fact that the government has taken on a policy of draining money from the poorest and often more minority schools (like ivey lane) and giving it back to the richer whiter schools in the form of cash vouchers for the students who'se families have the means to pay for and deliver their students to the richer schools.

    The students who do not or cannot escape are left behind and swept farther under the carpet. Those are the students I teach.
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    My property tax dollars go...
    where you live.

    [pause for dramatic effect]

    So, if you in fact would like to see your tax dollars go to a more "deserving" district, why haven't you moved?
  10. #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    where you live.

    [pause for dramatic effect]

    So, if you in fact would like to see your tax dollars go to a more "deserving" district, why haven't you moved?
    Not quite. Many citys/states distribute property taxes to schools in a very unbalanced manner.
  11.    #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    where you live.

    [pause for dramatic effect]

    So, if you in fact would like to see your tax dollars go to a more "deserving" district, why haven't you moved?
    perhaps because he likes the home he has -- the view, his neighbors, the parks nearby -- or perhaps he fears the neighbors across the tracks, or he doesn't want his kids attending their second rate schools. (maybe there's no Starbucks over there
    )

    Any and all are sufficent reasons -- but that doesn't excuse a system that by its design re-enforces inequity.

    why are schools (the prime mobility engine in society) chiefly dependent on a revenue source that is inherently prejudiced to the already well off ??

    Would it not be more equitable if school financing was based on a per student allocation, (adjusted for local costs), -- that indivual districts could then budget as they saw apropriate ??

    (overall the policies republican presidents and congressmen have pursued for the last 25 years have strengthened and further enriched the wealthy, while they have deepened the gap between the super rich and the poor and middle class.
    The rich have been able to afford the cost of buying those congressman and presidents who would then enact tax and subsidy poilcies that would disproportionately benefit them. )
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    where you live.

    [pause for dramatic effect]
    Mon Dieu!!! Oh the humanity! A person is taxed on his property and the money goes to schools in his district? I aghast and ashamed!
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    perhaps because he likes the home he has -- the view, his neighbors, the parks nearby -- or perhaps he fears the neighbors across the tracks, or he doesn't want his kids attending their second rate schools. (maybe there's no Starbucks over there
    )

    Any and all are sufficent reasons -- but that doesn't excuse a system that by its design re-enforces inequity.

    why are schools (the prime mobility engine in society) chiefly dependent on a revenue source that is inherently prejudiced to the already well off ??

    Would it not be more equitable if school financing was based on a per student allocation, (adjusted for local costs), -- that indivual districts could then budget as they saw apropriate ??

    (overall the policies republican presidents and congressmen have pursued for the last 25 years have strengthened and further enriched the wealthy, while they have deepened the gap between the super rich and the poor and middle class.
    The rich have been able to afford the cost of buying those congressman and presidents who would then enact tax and subsidy poilcies that would disproportionately benefit them. )
    Sources?
  14.    #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Sources?
    I have time to cite just a quick example of the rich using their influence to magnify their already huge advantage. Last night's ABC news reported on how T-Bone Pickens -- Billionaire green mailer -- paid no tax last year.

    He managed this through using The Katrina relief act. Congress passed that law ostensibly to benefit the folks damaged by the crimial devastion suffered by the bush/brownie victims. The law provided particularly generous tax benefits for charitable contributions -- lobbyists changed the law so that donations need not be tied to Katrina relief. This enabled T Bone to donate $165 million to the Okie Univ. golf team. (then they gave it right back to his hedge fund.) FORE!! ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    I have time to cite just a quick example of the rich using their influence to magnify their already huge advantage. Last night's ABC news reported on how T-Bone Pickens -- Billionaire green mailer -- paid no tax last year.
    All I want is for one person to provide a source that shows statistically how our school funding is skewed to benefit white children over minorities.

    Is that wrong? Am I out of place for not assuming that your thesis is fact?
  16. #76  
    perhaps because he likes the home he has -- the view, his neighbors, the parks nearby -- or perhaps he fears the neighbors across the tracks, or he doesn't want his kids attending their second rate schools. (maybe there's no Starbucks over there)
    All reasonable and understandable. But the effect of "black flight" in part is the emergence of the "second rate" schools that are now bemoaned....and avoided.

    I think it is convenient to blame "the system" rather than examine root causes.
  17. #77  
    Not that it's likely to make a difference, but I've done some more research and found a 2002 GAO study presented to Charles Rangel and the House Committe on Weighs and Means.

    http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03234.pdf

    Some interesting findings:

    Our findings suggest that spending differences between the inner city schools and suburban schools in our review do exist, but these differences for the most part depend upon the metropolitan area. In some metropolitan areas, inner city schools spent more per pupil whereas in others suburban schools spent more per pupil. Spending differences, regardless of metropolitan area for the most part, seemed to be the result of differences in salaries and student to teacher and staff ratios.
    When we adjusted per-pupil expenditures to account for the extra resources students facing poverty, disabilities, and limited English proficiency might need, inner city schools almost always spent less per pupil than suburban schools. To compensate for additional challenges faced by schools in these areas, federal education dollars are generally targeted to low-income areas. As a result, federal funds have played an important role in increasing funding to inner city schools.
    Because federal programs, such as Title I, specifically target funds to schools in low-income areas, these federal funds generally helped reduce or eliminate the gap between selected inner city and suburban schools in terms of per-pupil expenditures. In the Denver and St. Louis metropolitan areas, federal funds generally eliminated the gap between inner city and suburban schools’ per-pupil spending. In Fort Worth, without federal funds per-pupil spending at the selected inner city schools would have been about 63 percent of selected suburban schools, and in Oakland, per-pupil spending would have been about 78 percent of suburban schools. However, selected inner city schools in Boston and Chicago would have still spent more than suburban schools without federal funds.
    Doesn't sound much like a conspiracy to me. And I still can't find the 3-1 per-student spending ratio between minorities and non-minorities supported anywhere. Sounds like another one of those urban legends.

    Is that to say that there isn't a problem with inner-city schools? Not at all. But, contrary to what our friends on the Left are wont to say, it doesn't seem to be purely an issue of funding.
  18. #78  
    Another interesting quote for those who care:

    Factors that may relate to student achievement differed between inner city and suburban schools in our study. Research has shown a positive relationship between student achievement and factors such as teacher experience, lower enrollment, more library books and computer resources, and higher levels of parental involvement. Among the 24 schools we visited, the average student achievement scores were generally lower in inner city than in suburban schools. Along with lower achievement scores, these inner city schools were more likely to have a higher percentage of first-year teachers, whose lack of experience can be an indicator of lower teacher quality. In addition, in comparison to the suburban schools, inner city schools generally were older, had higher student enrollments, and had fewer library books per pupil and less technological support. Finally, the type of in-school parental involvement in the inner city and suburban schools differed.
    My interpretation:

    1) Inner-city schools had more first year teachers because the tenured teachers are moving out of the city. What can be done about this except pay exorbitant salaries to keep teachers in the city jobs. Assuming, of course, that salary is the issue and not, say, personal safety.

    2) Inner-city schools tend to be more over-crowded. This is, of course, a legitimate complaint. One might go so far as to say that completely unincumbered illegal immigration may have a part to play in this. Silly, I know.

    3) Inner-city schools have fewer books and computers. What can be done here? Remember, these schools are in areas where even hospital computer terminals have to be bolted to the desks.

    4) Inner-city schools tend to have less parental involvement. What part will extra funding play here? Should we pay the parents to come to parent-teacher conferences?
  19.    #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Not that it's likely to make a difference, but I've done some more research and found a 2002 GAO study presented to Charles Rangel and the House Committe on Weighs and Means.

    http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03234.pdf

    Some interesting findings:

    Doesn't sound much like a conspiracy to me. And I still can't find the 3-1 per-student spending ratio between minorities and non-minorities supported anywhere. Sounds like another one of those urban legends.

    Is that to say that there isn't a problem with inner-city schools? Not at all. But, contrary to what our friends on the Left are wont to say, it doesn't seem to be purely an issue of funding.
    those stats that you quote may be accurate, hoovs. (I btw never mentioned 3/1 or any other number ).

    I wanted what I wrote about the inequity of using property taxes to fund schools to apply universally to all poor areas, irregardless of race -- poor rural apalachia, or indian reservations in N. Dakota -- or Newark NJ.

    There are lots of elements that contribute to a school's disadvantage -- and they are not only money -- and they are not only solved with money.

    But money is a baseline from which you can start -- though there is no substitute for a social culture that values and esteems educational success and achievement.

    Even if parents value education, it may not be enough if the kid lives in a universe where peers make sport in beating up geeks ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    those stats that you quote may be accurate, hoovs. (I btw never mentioned 3/1 or any other number ).
    I know. That comment was for Blaze.

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    I wanted what I wrote about the inequity of using property taxes to fund schools to apply universally to all poor areas, irregardless of race -- poor rural apalachia, or indian reservations in N. Dakota -- or Newark NJ.
    But, you see, I think you missed the whole point of my post. You still keep going back to that school funding-property tax correlation and I'm saying--and I think the facts support this--that there are other sources of funding to compensate for districts with low property tax revenues. State funding provides over half the total funds in some cases.

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    But money is a baseline from which you can start -- though there is no substitute for a social culture that values and esteems educational success and achievement.
    Unfortunately, funding has not only become a baseline but the be all end all in the minds of those in charge. On the other hand, why not? In defense of those educators who always clamour for more funding, they can't control outside factors like unckecked immigration, law enforcement, etc. They can only fix what they have control over. Ultimately, though, someone's got to address those outside factors or we're going to go broke.
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions