Correlation between income, education clear
Published February 8, 2015
Editorial by Wilmington Star-News, February 7, 2015.
Report card day was no more pleasant for school officials across the state than it is for students. The collective result of the first letter-grade scores for North Carolina schools last week could best be described as a "needs improvement." Yet the clearest takeaway is the stark disparity between affluent and high-poverty schools.
Locally, the difference was most pronounced in New Hanover County, where attendance zones often follow socioeconomic lines. For example, at each of the five elementary schools with a grade of A, well under 50 percent of students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches; only one – Codington, with 30.5 percent – has more than 18 percent of students eligible. Conversely, no school with more than 80 percent of students in the federal lunch program received higher than a C, with five receiving Ds and one – Virgo Middle – with an F.
The correlation played out statewide, according to an analysis by The News & Observer of Raleigh.
If these grades serve a purpose, it will be to shine a light on the strong influence family income has on academic performance – something teachers, administrators and parents have known for years. This does not render the grades meaningless in their own right.
The state was clearly grading on a curve. In no classroom does a 70 equal a B, but it did here. Next year, the standards will be even harder to meet. Schools will be measured on a 10-point scale, meaning there may be more failures next year without some action.
Many state and local school officials want to tweak the way scores are done to give more emphasis to student growth; 80 percent of the grade is based on standardized test scores that consistently skew in favor of students from higher-income families.
Students' progress from beginning to end of the school year is a good measure of the teacher's abilities and should be given greater consideration. However, monkeying with the grading scale does nothing to improve achievement – it just looks better on paper.
Schools cannot address the family, socioeconomic and societal factors that serve as barriers to student achievement. But every child can learn, and there were some exceptional performers among high-poverty schools across the state.
Officials – including the politicians who expect miracles from overworked and under-appreciated teachers – should look to those schools as models. They are the real achievers, and they could teach their counterparts a thing or two.
http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20150207/ARTICLES/150209753/1108/editorial?template=printart
February 8, 2015 at 6:49 am
Frank Burns says:
Nobody is looking at the core problem which is parents not making their children pay attention in school and do their homework. Don't blame the teachers for that.
February 8, 2015 at 11:49 am
Richard Bunce says:
Relatively wealthy parents have real education system options for their children. This real competition incentivizes traditional government schools to improve their performance. Extending competition options to relatively poor parents with education vouchers directly targets the issue.
February 8, 2015 at 3:13 pm
Vicky Hutter says:
We as a state and nation pump a great deal of money into helping the poor. Families, rich or poor, valuing education and being involved in the schools their children attend would go a long way to improving performance of kids without any new infusion of money. How many of the children under-performing in the schools in N.C. are in the country illegally with parents who do not speak or read English? who do not participate in programs set up specifically to help poor children? who have large television sets and provide the kids with video games rather than books? who do not take their children to the public library or read to them? who do not expect them to do homework or do their best in school? who do not care how their children do in school? The answer to the problems are not blaming the teachers, schools or doing more of what we have been doing for years--it's time for an honest look at the reasons for the failing of the child in the public schools and new solutions to the problem. Federal control of the schools is not the answer either; education should be the responsibility of the state with parents and the local community making decisions about what and how children are taught in their schools--not some "czar" or nameless bureaucrat in Washington.
February 8, 2015 at 3:56 pm
Tom Hauck says:
If the public schools do not want to take responsibility for teaching poor children then they should let them go to schools that will take the responsibility for teaching them.
When Governor Jeb Bush introduced the grade system in Florida in 1999, any child in a failing or F school for two years got to go to a school the parents wanted to send the child (another public or charter or private school) at state expense.
This beginning year -- Statewide the ED (or Economically Disadvantaged or poor) scored 45.9 on End of Grade tests while the Gifted (formerly known as NED or Not Economically Disadvantaged) scored 94.2.
Since the professional educators seem to know that poor students will do poorly, why have they not done anything about it? Why does it take a Judge Manning to try to force them to do something and still they do nothing. Anyone who knowingly condemns a child to a life of poverty by not teaching that child or speaking up to assure that the child is taught should be ashamed.
February 8, 2015 at 7:08 pm
Norm Kelly says:
Not only would vouchers targeted towards relatively poor parents help the entire situation, but it would also increase competition between government monopoly schools and private schools. Instead of whining about how income disparity makes such a huge difference, libs must get on the band-wagon of allowing choice for ALL families, not just 'the wealthy', that group most hated by libs!
There are private schools across the country whose primary population is 'poor kids'. Many of these schools excel at teaching and graduating educated kids with critical thinking skills. Is it just possible government monopoly schools could learn something from these schools? Is there something special about the kids who attend these private schools that actually educate? Are these kids simply academically gifted and chosen specifically to attend these private schools to make the schools look good? Certainly not. These private schools that purposely target 'poor' kids do it to bring some light to an otherwise dark educational environment. If families didn't want this type of choice, why is it that every time vouchers are offered, there are more applicants than vouchers? Parents are looking for choice. Part of that choice is to be able to afford to send their kids to a school whose goal is to educate not make excuses. When the school expects great things from even poor kids, most of the time the kids respond. And even if some of the kids don't excel, even graduating with the ability to read is an improvement over their other choices.
The answer isn't always more money, as libs would have us believe. The answer is in better teaching, the ability to accept kids where they are, expect them to excel, and hold them back/accountable if they fail to achieve.
