Low-income urban students know they attend substandard, second-tier schools that lack the technology, resources and extracurricular programs commonplace in schools of more affluent communities. And yet we continue to expect these students to prioritize education when budgetary and funding inequities demonstrate that urban education is neither a local, state, or national priority. Why should students on the Westside of Chicago not have access to the same resources, technology, and programming that is certainly offered at our nation’s “Top 100 High Schools?” Engaging technology programs like Hoops High demonstrate that attendance and (thus) academic performance will greatly improve in urban schools that are able to offer a range of exciting extracurricular classes directed at both the needs and the interests of the students.
Although this is exactly what I've been saying for years, it was reiterated in the New York Times today.
Why should teenagers care about something, when the adults who tell them to care, don't care about it themselves?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
is there an actual link to be found because that initial sentence reads more like a blanket generalization that is a bit skewed in my opinion.
Post a Comment