Paying students for good grades will realize an actual decrease in academic performance. These distinct disadvantages highlight why schools should not pay students for good grades. First, paying students for good grades causes practical problems in the classroom. According to the National Education Association (NEA), “Many teachers also say paying students for grades leads to practical problems in their classrooms, including pressure to inflate grades and conflict with students and parents.” These pressures and conflicts can lead to larger problems outside of school.
"America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and unbeatable determination to do the job at hand" (Truman). This could not be more true. The United States of America symbolizes so many different things for everyone like hope, prosperity, freedom, and a new beginning. The American Dream is "an American social ideal that stresses egalitarianism and especially material prosperity" and egalitarianism is "a belief in human equality especially with respect to social, political, and economic affairs" (Merriam-Webster).
The current regulations with the dress code prohibit the freedom of expression and limit diversity (Haynes 3). As a result, the dress code lowers students’ self esteem, confidence, and decision making in the community. Furthermore, a lack of self confidence and decision making halts progress for individuals to make certain decisions such as leading a group from an uncertain circumstance instead following rules that prohibit what to wear for a job (“Should Schools Have Dress Codes?” 2). Because of these reasons, students becoming decisive individuals in the future that will impact our democracy with their new ideas will we questionable and hazy. Additionally, it is important to note that the students that the school prepares for is ready to become successful and independent thinkers and not just followers of some limiting factors such as dress code policies and “arbitrary rules” (Robson 3).
To sum it up, paying student for good grades can lead to practical problems in teacher classroom. When considering the choice of paying student for good grade or not, the choice should definitely be not to pay student for good grades. Kids should not be paid for good grades because it gives pressure to students to inflate their grades, can lead to external motivators that may be affective and well intended and kids should be satisfied with their own accomplishment to success. For those who say paying for good grade is something every parents should do, it is not because kids are being bribed to do well in school.
The solution I am proposing is a whole new school system. The government will have to stop and realize the issue and invest time and money ifficently to help the school. It will difficult to get rid of testing seeing as that is what colleges look at to see if a student qualifies however if we pass a law or tweak the ones already in place we can change the norm for the evaluation of a student all together. The Society has slowly started to "teach to test" after the No Child Left Behind Act was enacted.
Deliberative democracy, which considers the participation of citizens in deliberations and decision-making as central to democratic processes, can be seen as a part of the agenda of deepening democracy and has evoked discussions on normative themes such as self-governance, participatory politics, and rational legislation. The public deliberation of free and equal citizens forms the basis of legitimate decision-making and political justification. Consequently, inclusion and political equality are the two basic norms of deliberative democracy, the crux of the matter being that people should have a role and equal opportunities to participate directly in the deliberations or making of decisions that affect them. The deliberative conception of
Child poverty denies children with the basic needs to survive, expand, and flourish. It also deprives children from having equal opportunities in school such as a good education based on where they live, the proper teachers needed, and the motivation to not drop out. The lower-class students of this generation are being deprived of a quality education whereas the rest of society not only gets an outstanding education, but is able to participate in after-school activities that increases the student's social skills as well as helps them educationally. One significant factor that serves to exclude children living in poverty from their peers is the increasing rate of children falling behind in school due to the lack of help that they have access
For instance Durkheim argues that school socializes students into the appropriate values and sort and select students according to their abilities and for the interest of majority of the citizens. In contrast to this, conflict theory argues that school function for the interest of the dominant groups. The theory also points out that the role of school in providing equality of opportunity is far more problematic than functionalists suggest. In relation to those theories, it is therefore inevitable to argue that although the objectives are to provide equal education to all pupils, it is not attaining to its objectives. The lower class pupils are not exposed to such encouragement thus make them unable to adapt to the progress and provision of the educational
Learning should already provide pleasure even without the offer of money, it should be an elysian . In the long run, students have lower than naturally motivated students. Schools shouldn’t be paying students for awesome grades because it leads to fights and arguments, students should only learn if they want to, and students have lower grades in the long run. To begin, schools shouldn’t pay students for worthy grades since it starts problems in the classroom. According to the Prairieecothrifter.com “ Should parents pay for good grades?
(Putnam, 1995) Trust, community, integrity, compassion, morality, tolerance, and family build a culture, a culture that encourages development, is more economically sound. It provides better schools, lower crime, and a more effective government. All of the topics we discussed, all of the literature that we read, brings it all to the point that as a person we must take the responsibility to own our decisions, educate ourselves on the issues, and be active participants in our society, as we are all interwoven
The VHSL(The Virginia High School League) is highly disliked by many school districts and people. In this article,people are not on board with the one man policy, one vote which helps schools with having a say in school changes. They believe that the system is not structured to help the schools make decision that could affect them as well. The schools want to pass a law that gives them more of a voice when it comes to the school rules and regulations. If the bill does get passed, it would change the voting structure for all schools in the future.
This means that leaders have the power to set a positive environment for the citizens of America. Leaders can create a positive environment by showing that they care, giving recognition to the people who deserves it, putting their time and effort into different matters, and making sacrifices. The benefits of leaders setting a positive environment for the citizens is that it makes them (the citizens) want to work harder towards a goal, it creates a lasting loyalty between the leaders and the citizens, it would make it easy for the citizens to follow the leaders, helps build important relationships, and lastly it can leave a lasting impact on the leaders for the better. Simon Sinek also said that “people need other people to help them feel safe and valued”. From the statement one can conclude that it is a leaders’ job to help people, in this case the citizens of America, feel safe and valued.
Zero-tolerance policies will teach children how society works - when you make bad choices, you will have bad outcomes. Parents and administrative claim that it’s important to keep these policies in schools because they help maintain a safe environment, while teaching students unacceptable behavior is (Sellors). “ Zero-tolerance policies remove difficult students quickly,” said Sellors. After these students are removed from a schools, it is harder for them to get into another school. Although some students who are expelled from school are offered an alternative education at disciplinary schools, those schools fail to provide a “meaningful education” (ACLU).
Testing would shine a spotlight on low-performing schools, and choice would create opportunities for poor kids to leave for better schools.” (Ravitch, 495). In some ways, they wanted to end the social difference in education, they wanted to give opportunity to students that does not have it. However, they are different in ways that Ravitch stated to believe that this dream was not going to be possible because the government was more worried about the test scores than the students gaining real knowledge, and Greene was still believing that choice, accountability, etc. were really helping students’