Wednesday, July 26, 2006

CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS HAVE BECOME EATERIES

Why feed your kid when the school will do it? Particularly if you are an illegal immigrant, which a large proportion of those discussed below are. And the schools probably do a better job of feeding the kids than they do of educating them. Just what we all need: Well-fed dunces!

More than half of California's K-12 public education students enrolled in free or reduced-price meal programs last year, the first time that the majority of youngsters were approved for assistance, according to state and federal officials. California was one of a dozen states where the majority of students were certified for such programs, said Jean Daniel, a U.S. Department of Agriculture spokeswoman.

In Contra Costa, almost a third of all students signed up for the federally subsidized lunch and breakfast programs, the third school year in a row the county has seen an increase in the percentage of students. Nearly seven out of 10 Pittsburg students enrolled, the largest percentage in Contra Costa, and an increase for the fifth year in a row. Roughly six out of 10 West Contra Costa students registered, according to the state Department of Education. "That's what schools are combating -- the impact of poverty," said Tom Tesler, director of categorical programs for Antioch schools, where almost 40 percent of students are enrolled in meal assistance. "The overlying factor that no one argues with is why students perform poorly is poverty. The socio-economic condition makes it difficult for them to do well in school."

State and federal officials, food-policy advocates and scholars point to a variety of factors for the increase, such as higher costs of living and stagnant wages, improved efforts to enroll students and changing views that school-meal programs are an important tool for families.

More funds for meals

Although some scholars consider the milestone another sign of public school decline, school food service managers and food-policy advocates see the increasing percentage of enrollees as a boon. Not only does it mean more students are being served, it also brings more federal money to school districts. "It's good for me financially," said Heidy Camorongan, director of food services for West Contra Costa schools. "The more free-and-reduced students I have who qualify -- I can feed them. Then once I feed them, I can claim reimbursement from the (federal government) and the state."

The larger trend of growing need may be difficult to address, but the federal government's capacity to change nutrition is huge, said Matt Sharp of California Food Policy Advocates. "On the micro level it positively influences the long-term eating habits of half of public-school children in the state," he said. To be eligible for free meals, the income of a student's family must be at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty line. For a family of four, that will equal $26,000 next school year. To qualify for reduced-price meals, for which students are not charged more than 40 cents, annual income must be from 131 percent to 185 percent of the poverty line, which would be at or below $37,000 next year for the same-sized family. A full-cost lunch is $2.50 at Antioch secondary schools, for instance, and $2.25 at elementary schools.

'Psychological marker'

Although the percentage of the enrolled students hovered under 50 percent for the three previous school years, crossing the majority threshold is a psychological marker for California, said Sean Reardon, an education professor at Stanford University. That does not mean that half the state's families are poor, said Deborah Reed, an economist with the Public Policy Institute of California. But free and reduced-price lunches commonly are used to gauge child poverty and are a prime marker of a school's socio-economic structure. A 2003 Public Policy Institute study shows that a school's academic performance tends to decline when the percentage of students who receive free or reduced-price lunch increases.

The state's child poverty rate stayed relatively the same from 2000 to 2004, at about 20 percent, according to the National Center for Children in Poverty. The percentage of low-income children, which includes poor children, declined slightly in that period to about 43 percent. Meanwhile, state Department of Education figures show that the percentage of students who receive free or reduced-price lunch has increased over the past five school years. Kathleen Walden, assistant director of child nutrition services for Pittsburg schools, said she sees more students approved for reduced-price lunch and fewer free lunches.

More here





BRITAIN TACKLES BULLYING

Parents of persistent school bullies could face fines of up to 1,000 pounds if they fail to tackle their children's behaviour. The Government has issued tough new guidelines on cyber-bullying as research published today shows that one in five pupils has been bullied via their mobile phone or the internet. Under the guidelines, schools will have to monitor "all e-communications on the school site or as part of school activities off-site". They will also have to update their anti-bullying policies and teach pupils e-etiquette.

"No child should suffer the misery of bullying, online or offline, and we will support schools in tackling it in cyberspace with the same vigilance as in the playground," said Jim Knight, the Schools Minister. "Every school should account for cyber-bullying in their compulsory anti-bullying policies, and should take firm action where it occurs." Mr Knight said that the Education and Inspections Bill would give teachers a "legal right to discipline pupils" and enable them to take firm action on bullying. Meanwhile, orders would force parents to tackle their child's persistent bullying and attend parenting classes or face 1,000 pound fines. Currently, pupils must be excluded once or suspended twice from school before their parents face any fine.

According to recent estimates, almost two thirds of teenagers aged 13 to 17 have home pages on networking sites, where they post photographs or chat with friends. A survey for the Anti-Bullying Alliance - involving 92 pupils from 14 London schools - found that a fifth had been victims of bullying by text, email or phone at least once or twice in the past two months. "Happy slapping" - in which an attack on a victim is videoed via mobile phone - was considered to be the worst form of cyber-bullying, while chatroom and instant-message bullying were considered less harmful than traditional forms. One third of the victims said that they did not report bullying incidents.

The study was led by Peter Smith, Professor of Psychology at Goldsmiths College, London. He said: "Ten years ago, psychologists thought of aggression in verbal or physical terms, which traditionally was a male domain. But cyber-bullying is more akin to relational or indirect bullying, such as spreading rumours, where girls are more likely to get involved." For phone abuse, the Government recommends that victims turn off incoming SMS for a few days, change their phone number and do not reply to text or video messages. Text harrassment is punishable by up to six months in prison.

Source

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL schools should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the poor and minimal regulation.

The NEA and similar unions worldwide believe that children should be thoroughly indoctrinated with Green/Left, feminist/homosexual ideology but the "3 R's" are something that kids should just be allowed to "discover"


Comments? Email me here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here. My home page is here

***************************

No comments: