Sentences with phrase «serve wealthier students»

When a Ballou teacher says his students have «mastered the material,» he may be right — but that material may be quite different from what students master at schools that serve a wealthier student body or are highly selective.

For instance, a national comparison of per - student funding levels from state and local sources among districts serving low - versus - high percentages of poor students found that in 20 states, districts serving wealthier students received more funding on average than those serving poorer students.

Not exact matches

Another group of students was exposed to «chilly» promotional statements that suggested that their university was focused on serving wealthier families as opposed to a socioeconomically diverse range of students and families.

Many experts on educational attainment levels have noted that high schools that serve low - income students tend to have overworked counselors who must handle many more students than do their counterparts at wealthier high schools.

I created a table and some basic scatterplots to show how charter high schools in New Jersey compare on SAT results to public high schools that serve students in some of New Jersey's wealthiest and poorest towns.

The percentage of students with special needs served by charter high schools is also more representative of the public high schools serving the wealthiest towns.

Charter high schools serve less LEP students than those even served by New Jersey's high schools in the wealthiest communities, let alone the districts located in the poorest communities, yet charter high school operate in communities with high percentages of LEP students.

Reliance upon supplemental funding through bonds and overrides disadvantages schools; while wealthy districts may be able to generate additional resources, they don't always have community support and underprivileged communities — serving Latino students in particular — often don't take the risk due to the little reward.

He reminds us that «in the US, wealthy children attending public schools that serve the wealthy are competitive with any nation in the world... [but in]... schools in which low - income students do not achieve well, [that are not competitive with many nations in the world] we find the common correlates of poverty: low birth weight in the neighborhood, higher than average rates of teen and single parenthood, residential mobility, absenteeism, crime, and students in need of special education or English language instruction.»

We are here to say it is not acceptable for the wealthiest country in the world to be cutting millions of dollars from schools serving our neediest students; to be cutting teachers by the tens of thousands, to be eliminating art, music, PE, counselors, nurses, librarians, and libraries (where they weren't already gone, as in California); to be increasing class sizes to 40 or 50 in Los Angeles and Detroit.

Though it serves primarily poor, mostly black and Hispanic students, Success is a testing dynamo, outscoring schools in many wealthy suburbs, let alone their urban counterparts.

The board is weighing a proposal that would send all but 186 of those students to the two nearby elementaries, shifting them out of schools that serve some of Loudoun's wealthiest neighborhoods.

Importantly, the gains were seen in all schools, from those serving mostly wealthy students to those with many needy students.

But wealthy students (in the highest quartile of family income), who attended schools that served the wealthiest families (schools in the lowest quartile of students receiving free and reduced lunch), scored a mean of 528.

Some elementary schools in the Hightop district serve mostly white students from wealthy homes; others educate students from less wealthy families and minority backgrounds.

Currently, the highest performing, most qualified teachers in New York City are disproportionately teaching in the city's wealthiest neighborhoods and schools, while schools serving low - income and students of color are disproportionately assigned the least qualified, lowest performing teachers.

In district - level analysis, the Education Trust finds that nationally districts serving high concentrations of low - income students receive on average $ 1,200 less in state and local funding than districts that serve low concentrations of low - income students, and that gap widens to $ 2,000 when comparing high - minority and low - minority districts.17 These findings are further reflected by national funding equity measures reported by Education Week, which indicate that wealthy school districts spend more per student than poorer school districts do on average.18

Not surprisingly, schools serving the most wealthy students get the highest rankings, so this ranking is more reflective of the school community wealth than the power of a school to support student learning.

If students and parents are to have real choices, shuffling urban students between struggling schools in their city is not a satisfactory answer — they must be able to «choose» the predominately white and wealthy schools serving suburban property owners as well.

Skeptics might assume that these benefits are associated mainly with wealthier schools, where well - resourced libraries serve affluent students.