Sentences with phrase «public education of poor children»

If you want to really make a difference in the public education of poor children of color and their families, you'll hold yourself accountable for both your successes and your failures.

Not exact matches

Over half of black children in public primary and secondary schools are concentrated in the nation's twelve largest central city school districts, where the quality of education is poor, and where whites constitute only about a quarter of total enrollment.

As a result, the poor are forced to send their children to public schools, many of which are failing, by any standard, to provide a useful education.

Some barriers include the negative attitudes of women and their partners and family members, as well as health care professionals, toward breastfeeding, whereas the main reasons that women do not start or give up breastfeeding are reported to be poor family and social support, perceived milk insufficiency, breast problems, maternal or infant illness, and return to outside employment.2 Several strategies have been used to promote breastfeeding, such as setting standards for maternity services3, 4 (eg, the joint World Health Organization — United Nations Children's Fund [WHO - UNICEF] Baby Friendly Initiative), public education through media campaigns, and health professionals and peer - led initiatives to support individual mothers.5 — 9 Support from the infant's father through active participation in the breastfeeding decision, together with a positive attitude and knowledge about the benefits of breastfeeding, has been shown to have a strong influence on the initiation and duration of breastfeeding in observational studies, 2,10 but scientific evidence is not available as to whether training fathers to manage the most common lactation difficulties can enhance breastfeeding rates.

It is part history, detailing the unexpectedly collaborative relationships that were instrumental in the expansion of these top public schools and part forward - looking; it's a story about the visionaries who reinvented American education for poor and minority children and are now reinventing it again.

James Tooley is out to defeat the notion that universal education for poor children in developing countries hinges solely on the expansion of public schooling.

The economist Milton Friedman was the first to propose vouchers as a different way of distributing public funds for the education of all children, rich and poor - with the assumption that parents, as consumers, would act in ways that improved education for all students, not just their own children.

In the late 1960s, Theodore Sizer, then at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, proposed a «Poor Children's Bill of Rights» that would have supplied scholarships of $ 5,000 per child to the poorest half of children in the United States, for use at any accredited school, public or Children's Bill of Rights» that would have supplied scholarships of $ 5,000 per child to the poorest half of children in the United States, for use at any accredited school, public or children in the United States, for use at any accredited school, public or private.

«Ordinary Resurrections»: An e-Interview With Jonathan Kozol For more than three decades, Jonathan Kozol has been a passionate voice and champion for the cause of quality public education for America's poorest children.

«Ordinary Resurrections» Jonathan Kozol has been a passionate voice and champion for the cause of quality public education for America's poorest children for three decades.

For poor children, a twenty percent increase in per - pupil spending each year for all 12 years of public school is associated with nearly a full additional year of completed education, 25 percent higher earnings, and a 20 percentage - point reduction in the annual incidence of poverty in adulthood.

But they are wanting in terms of their external validity for decisions about whether to expand present public programs for four - year - olds: They are from a time when very little of today's safety net for the poor was in place, when center - based care for four - year - olds was rare and even kindergarten was not the rule, and before the wave of Hispanic immigration that transformed the demographics of early education programs for children from low - income families.

What has become clear is that explicitly focusing on the educational concerns of poor and minority children regardless of where they live, and expanding that to the criminal justice reform and other the social issues that end up touching (and are touched by) American public education, is critical, both in helping all children succeed as well as rallying long - terms support for the movement from the parents and communities that care for them.

No Child Left Behind, which had strong bipartisan backing when it passed in 2001, was the signature education initiative of George W. Bush, who said the failure of public schools to teach poor students and minorities reflected the «soft bigotry of low expectations.»

The school reform movement must also embrace explicit and constant advocacy for poor and minority children and their communities as a critical component in advancing the transformation of American public education.

The State Department of Education, in collusion with non-educator administrators such as Steven Adamowski, have handed Achievement First millions in public tax payer dollars to experiment on children from poor families.

It also made it clear to suburban districts that they could no longer continue to commit educational malpractice against poor and minority children, as well as focused American public education on achieving measurable results instead of damning kids to low expectations.

All of the «options» Florida is offering have the same issues as public education: they are only as good as the quality of programs & people - administrators, teachers, evaluators, etc. implementing them - and more importantly, in the voucher plan there are two huge issues: 1) poor and uneducated parents rarely are aware of the range of quality and number of schools available (which I am sure the politicians are counting on) 2) Even if every parent were saavy in the needs of their child and the kind of school they should look for, there aren't enough of those schools available...

Trump's desire to see federal dollars follow poor children to the public or private schools of their choice echoes proposals that other Republicans have floated, including during last year's overhaul of the nation's main federal education law.

TFA, suitably representative of the liberal education reform more generally, underwrites, intentionally or not, the conservative assumptions of the education reform movement: that teacher's unions serve as barriers to quality education; that testing is the best way to assess quality education; that educating poor children is best done by institutionalizing them; that meritocracy is an end - in - itself; that social class is an unimportant variable in education reform; that education policy is best made by evading politics proper; and that faith in public school teachers is misplaced.

The rules requiring waiver states to submit plans for providing poor and minority children with high - quality teachers was unworkable because it doesn't address the supply problem at the heart of the teacher quality issues facing American public education; the fact that state education departments would have to battle with teachers» union affiliates, suburban districts, and the middle - class white families those districts serve made the entire concept a non-starter.

The Education Law Center argues that it's an important factor because when wealthy families opt out of public education, schools are left with higher concentrations of poor children, and there is less political will to boost funds for publicEducation Law Center argues that it's an important factor because when wealthy families opt out of public education, schools are left with higher concentrations of poor children, and there is less political will to boost funds for publiceducation, schools are left with higher concentrations of poor children, and there is less political will to boost funds for public schools.

The National Coalition for Public Education — which includes 50 organizations, including the Children's Defense Fund and the National Urban League — has also written that portability would expand the amount of students served through Title I and result in the poorest districts getting less of overall Title I dollars.

This isn't to say that these officials don't care about these children, but that they are disinterested in taking on the tough work needed to overhaul districts and schools in order provide kids with the schools they deserve — which includes challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations for poor and minority kids held by far too many adults working in American public education in Virginia and the rest of the nation, and the affiliates of the National Education Association which has succeeded for so long in keeping the Old Dominion's status quo queducation in Virginia and the rest of the nation, and the affiliates of the National Education Association which has succeeded for so long in keeping the Old Dominion's status quo quEducation Association which has succeeded for so long in keeping the Old Dominion's status quo quite ante.

This sort of backward thinking echo back to the days before the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001, when education policymakers and practitioners preferred to ignore the racialist policies that often made American public education a way - station to poverty and prison for poor and minority children.

The «failure» of public education is not the fault of the poor children of color who attend underperforming schools, but the failure of government to get integration right.

I probably cover Lakewood's morally and fiscally bankrupt schools too often, but this Ocean County school district that enrolls almost entirely Latino and Black low - income students pushes all my education reform buttons: tyranny of the majority (in this case the ultra-Orthodox residents who control the municipal government and the school board); lack of accountability; lack of school choice for poor kids of color but anything goes (at public expense) for children of the ruling class; discrimination against minority special education students.

Instead of honestly acknowledging the root causes of struggling schools and investing in real equity in public education, today's policymakers and deep - pocketed corporate education «reformers» offer misguided strategies that fail to address the central problem: a failure to invest in Black, Brown and poor children, the educators who teach them and the communities in which they live.

To repeat, the Common Core SBAC pass / fail rate is intentionally set to ensure that the vast majority of public school students are deemed failures, and making the situation even more unfair, the Common Core SBAC scheme particularly targets minority students, poor students, children who are not proficient in English and students with disabilities that require special education services.

In the name of reform, the Gates Foundation has wielded its political influence to effectively shift public funds, earmarked for the service of poor children, away from investment in those children's direct education experience.

If we become a country that rejects facts and analyses that do not support our political positions, sees research independently conducted and reviewed as dangerous, treats public education as only one — and one of the least desirable — ways to educate our children, makes it even harder than it is now for poor and minority children to get a college education, then, in my view, our days are numbered.

Of course, the reformers don't really care about the education of poor children — they see the lure of school choice and charter schools as the bait for parents frustrated by the systemic defunding of their local public schools, especially in urban centers, and who are desperate for any option that promises a better alternativOf course, the reformers don't really care about the education of poor children — they see the lure of school choice and charter schools as the bait for parents frustrated by the systemic defunding of their local public schools, especially in urban centers, and who are desperate for any option that promises a better alternativof poor children — they see the lure of school choice and charter schools as the bait for parents frustrated by the systemic defunding of their local public schools, especially in urban centers, and who are desperate for any option that promises a better alternativof school choice and charter schools as the bait for parents frustrated by the systemic defunding of their local public schools, especially in urban centers, and who are desperate for any option that promises a better alternativof their local public schools, especially in urban centers, and who are desperate for any option that promises a better alternative.

Public health nurses and social workers provided in - home education and health care to women and children, primarily in poor urban environments.3 4 At the beginning of the 20th century, the New York City Health Department implemented a home visitor program, using student nurses to instruct mothers about breastfeeding and hygiene.