Sentences with phrase «poor school districts get»

«That means that we can now focus our efforts in the coming years on getting New York City schools the Campaign for Fiscal Equity money they are still owed and building equity into the state aid formula so that poor school districts get more state aid than wealthier ones,» Mulgrew said.

Not exact matches

It's certainly a win - win situation for these schools, but it also creates a disturbing picture of rich kids nibbling on sushi and having enough money for the team uniforms, while poor kids in a neighboring district are not only getting eating subpar food, they're often selling candy and other junk food to raise money for those same uniforms, further contributing to poor health habits that may last a lifetime.

But the experiment does make the point, I think, that for all the school food improvements we've seen in our district (and I'm grateful for all of them, don't get me wrong), there are still offerings that permit kids to make very poor selections on the lunch line, selections that may well have an adverse impact on their health down the line.

Schenectady Schools superintendent Larry Spring says his district, one of the poorest in the state, should be getting $ 62 million more in aid per year, if the court order were followed.

[9] These weights mean two states with the same number of poor and non-poor students would get more Title I funds if those students are economically segregated across school districts.

But any state choosing this option would experience changes in how Title I funds get divided among and within its school districts — even if all poor students were to attend public schools.

Not only did the district, the largest in the country, take on a student population that had come to symbolize the impossibility of educating a certain kind of child — the urban poor who entered high school two and three grades behind — but it succeeded in getting those students to graduation.

The study, which is scheduled to be published next year, «shows how an often - discussed phenomenon — that schools serving poor children get less qualified teachers than schools in the same district serving more advantaged children — is hard - wired...

It says that to get federal money, districts have to prove a few things — among them, that they're using state and local dollars to provide roughly the same services to kids in poor and non-poor schools alike.

Over at the State Department of Education, Stefan Pryor got rid of Connecticut's experienced Leaders in Residence and the team of experts who were dedicated to helping Connecticut's Priority School Districts improve educational opportunities in the state's poorest dDistricts improve educational opportunities in the state's poorest districtsdistricts.

As reported yesterday in Dropout Nation, the civil rights collection's data on whether districts are providing comprehensive college - preparatory education to all of its students is flawed because it focuses on proportionality of course participation compared to overall district enrollment; this doesn't fully reveal the extent of how few kids — especially those from poor and minority backgrounds — are not getting the preparation they need to do well in traditional colleges, technical schools, and apprenticeships (and ultimately, in the adult world).

Unfortunately, when we looked at the data from California's 20 largest districts, it wasn't clear that poor schools were getting more funding than wealthier schools.

That is one - third the district average, making it one of the wealthiest schools in a district whose students overall have gotten poorer.

The NCLB law gives parents the choice to withdraw their students and send them elsewhere, rather than address the concentration of low - performing minority students — typically poor ones — that did not have the resources to get find their way to more distant schools in their own districts.

They'll go to another poor school district and get taxed at a higher rate.

This is a terrible disservice to magnet families, who will be on the hook for anywhere from $ 1000 to $ 2500 each year for poorer families, and $ 3000 to $ 6000 for wealthier families depending on which district operates the school and how much it gets for each student from the state's basic magnet subsidy.

With only days to go until the start of the new school year, Connecticut's 30 Alliance Districts, the thirty poorest school districts in the state, still haven't heard whether they are getting the additional funds that Governor Malloy and the Connecticut General Assembly promised them for tDistricts, the thirty poorest school districts in the state, still haven't heard whether they are getting the additional funds that Governor Malloy and the Connecticut General Assembly promised them for tdistricts in the state, still haven't heard whether they are getting the additional funds that Governor Malloy and the Connecticut General Assembly promised them for this year.

As I have noted, stronger standards alone aren't the only reason why student achievement has improved within this period; at the same time, the higher expectations for student success fostered by the standards (along with the accountability measures put in place by the No Child Left Behind Act, the expansion of school choice, reform efforts by districts such as New York City, and efforts by organizations such as the College Board and the National Science and Math Initiative to get more poor and minority students to take Advanced Placement and other college prep courses), has helped more students achieve success.

This past week President Obama sat down to a lovely salmon dinner with a few teachers with inspirational stories, to discuss his new program to get excellent teachers for children in poor school districts.

Ending traditional school funding — especially the use of property tax dollars as a funding source for districts and schools (which account for 34 percent of school funding in the Wolverine State)-- would get rid of excuses traditional districts use to oppose all forms of school choice, keep poor and minority kids out of the schools they operate, and refuse to take on other systemic reforms.

What is annoying, to say the least, is that despite these difficult economic times, and while we're making a special effort to invest in our poorest, most challenged urban school districts, we've got school administrators like Paul Vallas and Steven Adamowski who begin by hiring consultants and laying off the very Connecticut residents who have been working so hard to make a difference.

While schools in Detroit have been allowed to rot, and district and state administrators have had poor mouths, in 2011, A.L. Holmes got a $ 2.8 million school improvement grant from the State of Michigan.

All in all, Connecticut» 6,000 charter schools students will get that extra $ 2,600 each while the 222,000 students in Connecticut's thirty poorest and lowest performing school districts will get an average of $ 150 each.

But now the state's Attorney General wants the teacher evals from the «lowest performing schools» — we all knew this was primarily a divide - and - conquer strategy — endless testing and infinite evaluations are for poor districts only — get the message?

But I have not seen concerted attention to the schools and teachers serving poor kids to make sure they get the extra resources they need to implement the Common Core as effectively as it will be in affluent districts.

Then there's question four: How can a state help poor and minority kids get high - quality education when the elimination of AYP and subgroup accountability as the levers for holding districts and schools responsible have been replaced with new systems that render those kids invisible?

Last summer, Randi Weingarten and the leadership of the American Federation of Teachers — Connecticut Chapter was committed to endorsing Governor Dannel Malloy's and his effort to get re-elected to the governor's office despite the fact that Malloy was the only sitting Democratic Governor in the nation to propose doing away with tenure for all public school teachers and unilaterally repealing collective bargaining rights for teachers in the poorest school districts.

teacher6402: «The reason that scores and achievement are so low in urban districts is due to many factors: transient leadership, unqualified administrators, lack of curricula, poverty and transient students, lack of parental and community support, politicians posturing at the expense of poor and urban communities, and yes - ineffective teachers who often get in to urban school districts because they lack the skill set and content knowledge to get in to other districts.»

Now districts must demonstrate that their methods of funding make sure that poor schools get their fair share.