Students in rural areas have to travel farther to reach
school than their urban counterparts — a commute of several hours by boat is considered normal — and many of their parents may not have the education level necessary to help with high school homework.
Not exact matches
In general, charter
schools that serve low - income and minority students in
urban areas are doing a better job
than their traditional public -
school counterparts in raising student achievement, whereas that is not true of charter
schools in suburban areas.
In fact, dollar for dollar,
urban schools in Connecticut are funded at levels equal to or in some cases higher
than their suburban
counterparts.
Last time I checked, the highest performing charters were doing better
than their district
counterparts in
urban districts, but very few of these
schools have come close to closing the achievement gap when it comes to college and career - readiness.
Fact 6: While charter
schools are predominantly located in
urban areas, charter
schools, on average, are more racially / ethnically diverse *
than their traditional district
school counterparts (comparative districts).
On average,
urban and rural
school buildings were much older (76 percent and 75 percent, respectively, were more
than 21 years old)
than their suburban
counterparts (59 percent were more
than 21 years old).
And in rural counties, which often have far worse Internet access
than their
urban counterparts,
schools have been developing ways to improve bandwidth as well as access to devices including iPads and Chromebooks.
Conversely, poor salary was the leading factor for dissatisfaction in low - poverty suburban
schools (61.1 percent) with administrative support (30.1) and faculty influence (14.3) proving less significant for suburban teachers
than their
urban counterparts.
With high test scores and graduation rates to flash around, suburban
school officials have had an easier time
than their
urban counterparts arguing that charters are an unnecessary drain on their budgets.