Replies

Sociologist James S. Coleman sparked a national debate with his 1966 study concluding that the differences in student achievement had more to do with home life and family wealth than what goes on in the schoolhouse.

Educrats point to such studies to excuse lackluster student performance in the schools. Then they beg for more of the taxpayers' money.

But if it is the home environment that truly matters, why bother giving more money to the schools?

Logophile wrote:

"But if it is the home environment that truly matters, why bother giving more money to the schools?" WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

Uh huh....that sociologist dude..kinda swerved into some truth there..now didn't he? Course we won't be a hearing that more money should stay in the sheeple's pockets. Ha!

Government schools are the biggest monopoly in America today. The Democrat Socialist Leftists..rail and rant against perceived corporate monopolies...but keep the children of this country fettered to a cancerous system that has imploded.

I am 53, we had usually 30-35 kids per class, we were NOT by any means well off. Just above poverty. Lived in the burbs of Hammond Ind. My parents DID NOT take an active roll in my education, beyond providing the materials I needed to perform in school. My parents had a 5th & 6th grade education. They made it VERY PLAIN it was MY responsibility to LEARN what the teachers taught. By the time I was in the 8th grade I read at the 12th grade level. Math was my weakest area. I graduated in the middle of my class in HS from an INNER CITY school that had a student population from all over Hammond, Ind. Hammond Technical Vocational HS. We were a very diverse lot, no child was treated differently because of their skin color or lack of wealth.

Abe Lincoln had only a couple of years of formal school and managed to self educate himself into being a lawyer.