Not exact matches
The endowments of the
wealthiest universities should be taxed to fund a common purse for education that can be spent on tuition tax credits to help all Americans afford some form of post-high school education,
which is what we need today as the old
student loan model becomes burdensome for young people.
Congress is considering a proposed $ 13 million study
which would analyze the benefits of a free school breakfast for all
students — in low - income and
wealthy neighborhoods alike.
The relationship,
which is based on grounds of mutual benefits, is ideal for
wealthy businessmen and female
students who seek a better lifestyle in foreign land.
A «sugar daddy» sponsors «sugar baby», often penniless
student,
which focuses on a
wealthy man to fund his rent or his studies in exchange for visits to restaurants or the theater.
This comedy presents the story of a white college
student who desperately wants to enroll in the Harvard Law School, but since his
wealthy father refuses to help him pay the $ 54,000 he needs, so he begins taking tanning pills to darken his skin so he will be eligible to win the Bouchard Fellowship
which is only awarded to African - American
students.
Some, such as Slovenia ($ 27,868) and Greece ($ 29,483), were roughly half as
wealthy as the U.S. Only Norway ($ 53,968) and Singapore ($ 48,490) have higher per - capita wealth than the U.S. Overall, the countries with
which we compare U.S.
students are our major economic competitors.
But they receive comparatively little attention relative to public colleges and the for - profit sector, perhaps because the conventional wisdom casts private colleges based on the profile of the most elite institutions in the sector,
which have large endowments and charge high tuition to mostly
wealthy students.
«
Wealthy anti-union advocates like David Welch, the funder of this suit, are obscuring the real problems of public education,
which are best addressed by restoring funding to programs that ensure
student success.
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.»
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.
We in CT have some very
wealthy areas where
students score extremely high on tests - higher than
students in many other states -
which creates a wider gap between low poverty and high poverty
students.
He declared unconstitutional and «irrational» the way Connecticut funds and oversees local public schools; he found that the state government has the enforceable responsibility under Connecticut's constitution to provide all
students an adequate education — not just the
wealthy suburban kids who rank first nationwide in reading scores, but also the many «functionally illiterate» high - school graduates from the 30 poorest Connecticut school districts,
which rank below Mississippi and 39 other states in those same scores.
The study arrives as legislators consider an override of Governor Bruce Rauner's amendatory veto of Senate Bill 1,
which would rewrite the school funding formula to drive more dollars to the state's neediest districts and begin to close funding gaps between low - income and
wealthier students.
SB1,
which passed the General Assembly on May 31 and is heading to Gov. Bruce Rauner's desk, replaces the current formula that shortchanges our neediest
students, providing 81 cents to low - income
students for every dollar spent on their
wealthier peers.
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
Fund my District at 11,000 per
student (
which is what it costs to educate a
student in a
wealthy suburban school district) and then we can help others.
ALL CHILDREN CAN ACHIEVE - We believe that all children can achieve,
which is why the achievement gap between low income
students and their
wealthier peers can, and must, be closed.
«Studies have found that
students from low - income families lose ground academically over the summer, and also are less likely than
students from
wealthier families to have access to enriching, non-academic experiences,» said Lucas Held of The Wallace Foundation,
which released the guide in partnership with Crosby Marketing Communications of Annapolis, Md. «Many of these parents and
students aren't used to thinking of summer as an opportunity for learning, so it was important to listen to them and to market voluntary summer learning opportunities in ways that would appeal to them and to their children.»
To examine the ways in
which people in
wealthy countries are culpable in consuming products created by child laborers,
students can create inquiry projects that investigate the manufacturing of a favorite item, such as a pair of shoes or an electronic gadget.
The only households in
which student debt has not been a growing proportion of total debt were households headed by seniors, households headed by those without a high school education, and households in the
wealthiest quarter of households by net worth.