Poorly Funded Public Schools

I believe that what may be happening with schools today is that they are protecting the wealthy by providing lesser education to the poor. One way they do this is by having some schools spend less money per student. At some poor rank schools, the average spending rate on a student ranges between 8.5k and 10.5k where as for richer schools they go from 11k to even 12k per student. This is pretty much saying that not every student is receiving the same amount of books, materials, and resources. Like in the book, these students in better schools have the resources that other schools lack. Many of these cities that have poorly funded schools also tend to have a higher drop out rate. Tennyson High School has a 5% drop out rate, whereas a school like Mills High School has it in the decimals. When a school has more dunding, the student is more likely to want to attend. When they see things that are broken, torn or don't work, they a sense of respect for it.

Another thing I have noticed in doing research about the "bad" schools is that the majority tend to be either Black or Hispanic. Willbrook Middle School in Compton has a majority of 97% of the students being Hispanic, and a 13% drop out rate. I also noticed that over half of the students need to take some type of ESL(English Second Language) class. What this is saying is that these students might be first generation immigrants and struggle in learning the English language. They probably don't feel any type of motivation in learning it if they see everyone doesn't want to either. The schools probably don't provide enough materials, teachers, or even time and effort into teaching these kids how to read and write in English. Though a Hispanic majority tends to be common in schools that do poorly, that isnt nessicarily a factor. In Sequioa High, of Redwood City, they have a 61% Hispanic majority. In this school, they exceed the state average in most subject, especially mathematics, and come from one of the state's better districts. The main difference I noticed between these two schools were that Compton is far below the State average in income, and Redwood City exceeds it by plenty. In other words, ethnicity does not play a part in the stability of the students, but rather social class does. When these kids come from poor, they are likely to stay poor, and when they come from richer, they are likely to stay richer.

The main thing I think I noticed when looking at the test scores for all the schools of my research(both rich and poor) are the test scores. Be it, the schools exceeds or lacks their ability in higher materials, the students in lower level subjects never do well in them. Mills High School in Milbrae has some the best math scores in the state for their high school mathematics, however, the students in basic or low level math are doing so poorly, it doesn't look like the same schools scores any more. What I'm suggesting is that the teachers that can teach well, aren't teaching every type of student. A teacher can't just prove to be an excellent teacher and gain appraisal from teaching students that, theoritically, might not need them. The teacher needs to use their talents in teaching students of all types, especially the ones falling behind. There is a separation there. Either the separation is from the teachers preference, or its from their fear of experimenting a different teaching method to approach a different type pf audience, the division is still there. I, personally, remember going to Tennyson High School hearing students, that had higher level classes, talk about their teachers and having any of those names allign with my lower level classes. The division is there. They have it so that good students get good teachers and so bad students get the bad teachers. That's how they maintain that whole rich stay rich poor stay poor philosophy.

Savage Inequalities Paragraph

The main problem I seem to notice with the story in this book is that the poverty surrounding is what affects the children's capability to learn. One major problem with poverty in the area is that studnets don't often have the proper supply and space to work. Kozol states in his book Savage Inequalities that,"There are no science labs, no art or music teachers...There are two working bathrooms for some 700 students"(63). Without the proper material a student is very unlikely to have any type of motivation in learning. Another problem with poverty is that it makes the living conditions in the area hard to focus on school. He talks about the raw sewage and diseases being caused from the raw sewage making its way into the lives the of the people(21). This makes it very uncomfortable for the kids to get educated. If half the time the students are sick than half the time the students are unable to go to school. Another problem when poverty strikes the way of education is that there is very little funding for proper educators to teach the class. In the book a teachers says,"'I get $38,000 after nearly 30 years of teaching...If I taught at Chicago suburbs, at a wealthy high school like New Trier, for example, I'd be getting close to $60,000'"(30). When teachers make less, they don't feel they should have to do as mucb of the work. It gives the teachers, almost, right to be unmotivated.

My Three Paragraphs

What happens with homework is that teachers will start to get the chance to become lazy. Let's say the situation is that the teacher's lecture doesn't finish on time, so, whatever the student did not get to, the students are to do their best to improvise when they get home and open their books for homework. If this "situation" keeps occuring, then the student will never recieve any education from his educator. Rather, what will happen, the student will teach himself entirely using the same book the teacher is meant to be helping him understand. Teachers are also given the chance to assume the student has learned all the material by the time they get to the exam. Teachers are meant to follow some type of criteria, or in other words, meant to to teach by the book. It is the teachers' responsibility to assure the student understands the read material, not just go off on some assumption. When they go off some assumption, the process of teaching and learning isn't occuring anymore, but rather a perspective of say and do. Teachers need to get more active in the part of actually teaching. Jeff Bliss states,"If you would just get up and teach'em instead of handing them a packet"(1). Not all students learn from the process of individual assessments, some need that extra reach of attention to feel that they have reason for learning this.

What else happens when teachers become lazy is that the teachers become less motivated. Teachers should not lose their motive for teaching because then the students empathize on her emotion. The narrarator in the Passion Project states,"If we recognize a universal feeling like boredom or being loved our mirror neurons return us to...being bored or loved"(7). When teachers lose their motivation, students lose their motivation for trying. The students can pick up on the teacher's vibe. It is most important that the student has their enthusiasm in class or they will not be able to focus. Also when a teacher feels less motivated they are likely to show poor teaching skills. Karina in The Passion Project states that,"Really a lot of teachers think that content is enough. Like it's not enough...I don't see value in it"(13). Knowing the material simply doesn't do enough for the student. Not only is it required for the teacher to know the material, but to be able to express it into the mind of the student for the best understanding. Usually if a teacher is less motivated, they are less likely to show up to class. I remember having a teacher that would never show up. Teachers need to show up. When they don't, the student never gets a full connection with the educator he is given thus never gets the full connection with the content they are expected to know.

When a teacher gets lazy she won't usually pay attention to the classmates as individuals, but as the whole class. Meaning that if a teacher gets upset at one student, they are likely to get upset with the whole class. I have seen situation where a student starts to give a teacher a hard time and the teacher starts giving the other students disrespect. It isn't fair for another student to feel disrespected for something another student did. It shows the good students that they can still receive bad treatment for their cooperation in the class. Teachers also shouldn't view the class as a whole because then the teacher expects the entire class to be at the same pase. Studies show that students that are behind in class are usually behind because they say the teacher goes to fast and doesn't allow anyone to keep up. A student has the right to learn at which ever pase they need. The teacher should not expect their student to be at the same level as the other students just because they don't have the energy to go back.

My thoughts on Sir Ken Robinson's: Bring on the learning revolution

His ideas in this lecture were extraordinary. What really got me was when he says how the educational system's format had not been really updated since the industrial revolution, which was when the objective of teaching was to insure you will be able to perform for what the working world asks.  I also like the part where he discusses how," If your not prepared to be wrong, you will never come up with anything original" and the educational system in a way contradicts that idea by making it so that a mistake is the worst thing that can happen when in fact being wrong is in fact a more superior teacher. He does a very good job at claiming his case that the educational system should view creativity as important as reading and writing.