The article written by, Chris Selley talks about the differences between wealthy and poor schools. First of all wealthier schools raise more money from parents than public schools full or poor kids. Wealthier public schools that do massive fundraising raise up to $500 and even $1000 per student in one year. One of the main recommendations is banning parental donations to public schools, as long as the government will pay for all the funds. Another option is that they'd be better off leading with their plan B, which is pooling all parental donations and distributing them evenly throughout all the other schools so each school has the same amount of money. Also some schools exclude students from participating in any school activity or event based on the ability to pay, some activities or events may require some recovery of the cost for participation.
The top 10 fundraisers brought in $515 per student and got an average of 8.75 out of 10 rating. Where the top 10 schools in the Fraser Institute rankings all ranked 10 or 9.9 for raising an average of $164.45 per student. Also the bottom 10 fundraisers brought in $17 per student, and an averaged a 5.3 rating out of 10. When the bottom 10 schools in the Fraser Institute rankings had an average rating of 2.3 brought an average of $58.64 per student. Therefor there is by no means a connection between fundraising and academic achievement, as the top 10 ranked schools show. The most they raised was $234.86 per student, where 73 other schools raised more than that, and only 1 of the 10-out-of-10 schools was among the bottom 10 in TDSB fundraisers.
To me this shows that the schools with poorer kids can't pay for some school activities and events or certain things at school, like fundraisers because they don't have the money. Like in one year some schools can only raise up to $17 per student, where wealthier schools raise much more. This also gives me an idea that maybe some of the kids can't pay for certain things like fundraisers because they're living in a bad neighbourhood, or maybe they're parent(s) can't pay for certain things because they either might not have a job, or have other things to pay for like basic needs for their families. Where as the wealthier schools are more fortunate and raise between $500 and $1000 per person in one year, which shows that these students are able to pay for certain things like school activities and events because their families can afford them. Also they probably live in a better neighbourhood than the poorer kids and they're parent(s) most likely have a decent job where they get paid a good amount of money.
In this case i don't think it's fair at all that some people might not be able to afford certain things therefore they're not allowed to participate in some activities, where the people who can afford certain things can. Also the fundraiser rankings show that some schools rankings are not accurate, or are unfair because some schools who earned more money than other schools we're rated lower then they were supposed to be which is wrong. People have always debated the importance of unequalness, but nobody denies the importance of education; in other words we debate on what's unfair but we should not debate on whether or not kids should get a proper education, and be included in school activities no matter how much money they have.
No comments:
Post a Comment