Posted by strikeout26 on 1/8/2018 6:33:00 PM (view original):
Every public school has bad lunches. Aesthetics's of the school shouldn't have an impact. It comes down to quality of teacher and even more than that it comes down to quality of parent.
"In direct terms, these factors indicate whether the state and school district prioritize serving poor students by diverting needed funds, even in a financial downturn. Some take for granted that disparities among affluent and poor schools will persist. However, students and teachers at poor schools, both consciously or subconsciously, can see and absorb the message that neither they nor their learning [*40] matters. If Kenneth Clark's "doll test" that was included in the famous footnote eleven in Brown v. Board of Education and persuaded the Court to see the "badge of inferiority" and devastating impact of racial segregation on minority children, how much more persuasive is it to see the inferiority and low self-esteem that plagues the poor when living in impoverished schools and neighborhoods? As my former colleague at Teachers College and former New York State Education Commissioner Thomas Sobol once put: If you ask the children to attend school in conditions where plaster is crumbling, the roof is leaking and classes are being held in unlikely places because of overcrowded conditions, that says something to the child about how you diminish the value of the activity and of the child's participation in it and perhaps of the child himself. If, on the other hand, you send a child to a school in well-appointed or [adequate facilities] that sends the opposite message. That says this counts. You count. Do well." Maurice Dyson, 2016