Taking away E.P.A., State Department, Agriculture, and Education will mostly affect low and middle income people because they will not have sufficient money to get health care and food for their families. In addition, education is necessary for children to get a degree and a job. As of now, certain schools lack certain commodities; their food is not in good quality, and the arts department has less of a budget compared to higher departments such as math or sports. When students are not educated enough, they tend to get the idea that dropping out of school is the best option. They are wrong; without education people tend to be not well informed about current events.
The second article by Laura Clark, is more embracive towards the uniform idea, as she claims throughout the text that uniforms lessen bullying, increase the individual student’s behaviour and concentration and simply make the daily triviality of picking clothes disappear. The last article written by Suzanne Moore, shares the negative sides of wearing uniforms in school. Moore informs us how the idea restricts children and teenagers from doing certain activities and the uniform made her feel “dispirited by the ridiculousness of it” (p. 1, l. 12-13). There are plenty of reasons to why the uniform should be abolished; uniforms are expensive, many good schools don’t have uniforms and children bully each other because of their accessories instead of their clothes. 2.
Standardized testing is an issue with students fearful to fail the tests, with all the pressure and tension on them to overcome this predicament, as well as teachers ' jobs being in jeopardy. Most students from lower income families are at a disadvantage with this setup and groundwork for standardized tests, such as the SAT. A wealthier, more affluent family can buy higher quality and superior preparation books. Students even turn to various methods such as cheating, in order to overcome the tests. Another bad example of the aftermath of standardized testing is cramming, which some might do as a result of the lack of concern with studies.
There are many people out there that completely disagree with the Act or even the idea of fixing the crisis itself. people are saying that forgiving students from their debt would make them irresponsible with the extra money they’ll be making The fact of the matter is that if the Act were to pass, it would: eliminate many of the awful consequences of educational indebtedness. In doing so, it would give Americans greater purchasing power, helping to jumpstart the economy and create jobs. Of course, it does have some restrictions, but it will help the student loan debt crisis and the national debt crisis. The solution is that students will continue to pay their debt flexibly comfortably by paying ten percent of their income, and after twenty years of paying, the debts can be forgiven.
Most clothes that are long sleeves and are jeans cost more money than shorts and tank tops. If the school provided clothes that were decent for the ones that couldn't afford clothes then a dress code might be appropriate, but until then we shouldn't have a dress code. The people that really dislike having a dress code should actually point it out and tell someone and try to have it changed if so many people dislike it. I honestly think the dress code should change because of the money cost. We also need to reinforce other school issues, but the mst thing is school dress code.
Basing school funding on property tax leads to unequal opportunities and environments for students, even though the government may claim it is not up to them, there needs to be a drastic change. Currently, taxes collected from the surrounding communities fund public school districts. Public schools get financed mainly by the property tax of the surrounding houses. “Resources available to school districts relied heavily on local property wealth, and property wealth per pupil varied greatly, as it continues today” (Ikpa 469). The current system may be beneficial in high income neighborhoods where the tax rates are higher, but it is insufficient in low income neighborhoods.
This would also affect the parents causing stress and this would cause students to lose motivation. This is why schools should not extend their hours. If they did it would cause a giant problem for the school and students. School districts have already decided to increase school hours already but I disagree with their course of
Amanda Ripley demonstrates the consequences for having school sports in “The Case Against High School Sports” because schools are spending too much money on their sports and can be solved. The author brings to the reader’s eye that sports cost way too much money and should be cut. I think Ripley is wrong because even though it cost a lot of money, they should still keep the sports. If they cut the sports, then it’s not fair to the students that are graduating because they could of had a chance to get a scholarship. If the schools cut the sports, then there is no chance for the students.
Recently governor Chris Christie proposed a plan to extend the school day and year. I believe having the school day and year extended is not a very good idea. Since long days of school may cause extreme pressure on students and less time for outside interests. All in all I believe having longer school days and year can cause many issues to us students. Extending the school day and year is a controversial issue in which many people do not agree on .
Therefore, the Philippine Constitution of 1987 mandated to providing free education which resulted in the increase of enrollment in the public elementary and secondary schools. However, qualified public school teachers are hindered to perform at their best because of the lack of instructional materials, inadequate facilities and lack of training for professional growth. Furthermore, the number of students reaching up to sixty in a classroom have distorted the learning environment as well. A problem so true that teachers need to exert extra effort to attract a good teaching strategy. Quality education is the most important mission of every educational
As the community can tell, money is a big issue for schools today, another huge problem is the academic needs of the schools and students. Amanda Ripley stated that “America Lags behind other countries” around the globe with academics, but if we put more academics and canceled sports we would be able to catch up to the other countries in the learning program. Not only is Fremont high affecting their own learning, but also the middle school had to move in with the senior high school, and the “elementary school hadn’t had a music teacher in years”
Should school be year round with more breaks to improve education? My opinion is no, I think it’s a bad idea to have school year round. Having year round would have a negative impact on the students, they wouldn’t be able to spend as much time with family, and no time for themselves. Having school year round would have a negative impact on the students. Students stress level would be higher from all the constant work they would have to do, with no breaks would be confused.
However, the burden of requiring us to make a decision is still unreasonable. It seems as though in addition to the school system, now even parents believe that going straight to college with a career plan is the only option for their kids! Bottom line, there are other ways to have a good life. Making students feel as though these decisions are important is necessary, but we shouldn 't have ridiculous amounts of pressure piled on us to make major life decisions so quickly. I want my years of high school to be filled with exploration and open
Teacher recruitment is difficult the way it already is, and without tenure it would make it even harder to find the qualified teachers. “The promise of a secure and stable job attracts many teachers to the teaching profession, and eliminating teacher tenure would hamper teacher recruitment” (ProCon.org). Teacher recruitment and retention is difficult because of the low pay for a college-educated profession (Kahlenberg). Tenure allows schools an incentive for their educational college degree, making tenure a highly valuable form of compensation. In contrast, a tenure contract does not guarantee a teacher a job for life.
The pro side of the debate feels that charter schools are necessary to public education. They believe charter schools should be encouraged as an alternative to traditional public education simply because education is not a “one size fits all” (Genma Holmes). Not all children will excel in the same environment due to the mere fact that students all have different needs as individuals. However, what they do not recognize is that it comes at the cost of implementing more economic and racial segregation, widening the gap in student achievement. The establishment of these schools also means the “loss of funding for traditional public schools, leading to fiscal inefficiency” (US Connect).