This.
Although the welfare office would have to have a series of standardized tests that they could administer on a random basis so that the kid wouldn’t see the same thing over and over again.
This. Genius. Plus one.
What do you mean, “…we don’t get to…?”
Do you mean to say that you, personally, don’t believe we should?
Or do you mean there is something actually stopping us?
Can you imagine how quickly the demand for testing for special needs would rise? This is nothing at all workable, just another money-draining program that won’t help anyone at all.
Wait now, don’t allow yourself that stereotype either. Poor of course does not equal violent drunk any more than rich does.
We’re just people. All kinds of people.
Isn’t that a valuable outcome? We reliably identify the community of special-needs students, and eliminate those who do not fit that category. What’s the downside?
TANF already requires me to submit proof of attendance. We’re already threatened by CPS if our children have enough unexcused absences. We have to turn in report cards every time we re-certify.
Unrelated but always relevant in discussion of TANF, we adults also have to work at least 30 hours or attend school up to 10 hours plus 20 hours of work a week or we have to sign up with their community service program. Until I was declared disabled enough to be excused I worked in a church charity site 30 hours a week for my 142 dollars a month, 157 in food stamps, and state health insurance.
The downside is the parent looking for any way to get their kid in a program that may not be suitable at all, through any means necessary from not helping them with their work to encouraging them to lie about their abilities in order to keep getting benefits.
I HAVE a child with special needs and it’s already a battle to keep her in the therapies she receives in school. There aren’t enough speech and occupational therapists as it is. My daughter gets OT once a MONTH despite needing it much more. She gets speech twice a month despite being two years behind in language cognition and I have to fight for even this every IEP re-eval. Pile on the caseloads for students who are coached to fail tests… hell, we already know this happens because Hearing and Vision gets a pile of fake fails every year and that was just kids looking for attention. If their parents think they’ll lose part of what little they already get there will be a wild increase in fraud.
Being on TANF does not make one “chronically poor”. Considering there is a lifetime limit of 60 months (at least in my state), if you’re “chronically poor” you won’t be receiving that “gift” more than five years anyway. And you will be required to work within the first month of application or they will send you to work community service for your monthly check.
Basic respect for human dignity?
I can at least see the reasoning.
Most of the educators and education administrators I have heard talk on the subject of student achievement have said that parental involvement is the number one factor in student success. It’s also one the school has zero control over. So, you see a correlation with students doing poorly with uninvolved parents, and students doing well with involved parents, you want to do something to involve the parents.
The bill already has provisions for learning disabled; as Bricker points out, if this leads to an increase in LD testing, that just means the kids that need help will get identified as such. Heck, it would probably not be so bad to see every kid for LD, although this would get expensive fast it would likely also have positive education outcomes for students as a whole.
I can understand the outrage - it can be seen as kicking someone while they’re down, or the parent might be uninvolved because they’re working three jobs, or drunk daddy will just beat little Johnny. Actually, in the last example, that’s a case for CPS to take the kid into foster care, not really an argument against the bill.
This bill might have been better phrased as “you get a tax credit for each child that gets an A”, but if we’re honest, the guy making $20k a year working at a gas station is not motivated by a tax credit as much as the guy making $100k working at an office, and it’s the guy at the gas station that likely needs the motivation. (This is not intended to be derogatory to gas station workers, but let’s be honest, their kids are probably the ones with academic issues).
Parental involvement is the key to student success. I can understand why people don’t like this bill, but I’ve seen one proposed change (from TriPolar, and I like it if the details are fleshed out), and a lot of “those evil republicans hate poor people! No I’m not going to offer a better solution for something that’s an actual problem”. The issue I see with TriPolar’s solution is that, at first glance, it costs more money, whereas with the TN bill, at first glance, it saves money. (Of course, the long term costs/benefits may be far different).
You don’t like the bill, there are many valid reasons why, I understand. But can someone come up with another bill that would increase parental involvement in their child’s education and looks like it would save money?
Just so you know who is sponsoring this bill, I give you Stacey Campfield.
The guy is a local idiot who keeps getting re-elected (and mentioned on Colbert). Even my Republican friends think he is a performance artist trying to shock people.
He is known for answering emails with rude responses, and checking and responding to newspaper comments sections that mention him. So, hopefully he’ll do a vanity search and find this thread!
Every child in poverty has special needs. Educationally most will end up with some if aid is distributed on that basis.
I proposed a solution above, make it a bonus program. If anyone was serious about using incentives they’d see how the docking aid wouldn’t really be intended to help anyone. And it’s just damn stupid also, the societal cost of continued poverty is enormous, and cutting aid is just going to perpetuate the problem. You don’t solve problems by cutting back, you have to apply actual solutions. Welfare will never be more than a stop gap effort. We need proactive approaches to eliminate a problem that is crippling generations.
The guy may be an idiot (and reading the links you provided, I agree with your Republican friends), but that makes his bill neither bad nor good.
The thing is, they aren’t actually doing anything about the reasons why parent involvement is low. They aren’t fixing any of the problems or providing any tools. If they were genuine about their intentions, they would look at the enormous mountains of excellent research on how to improve parent involvement and draw on them any proven strategies.
A quick glance at the research shows that low parent involvement happens when:
- There is a cultural mismatch. Parents feel apart or excluded from school life. They may not receive communication in a language that they understand, or they may just not feel comfortable around the faculty. They may be embarrassed by their own education level or social status.
- Schools have poor communication. Parents do not see or understand how to be more involved. This one is HUGE. My understanding is that improving communication is the single best way to improving parent involvement.
- Parents lack confidence. Many parents do not feel that they have something meaningful to contribute to their child’s education. They may feel that they are not smart or accomplished enough to help their children effectively, and may feel it is better for a professional to do the actual teaching.
- Parents have other issues. Inflexible work hours, transportation issues, and difficulty in arranging for childcare all make it more difficult to be involved.
It’s rarely that the parents just don’t feel like it. Almost everyone wants the best for their kids, and all things being equal I think every parent would prefer A’s to C’s. But if parents don’t know how to contribute, don’t feel like they belong in the education process, or just plain can’t find time, how is punishing them going to help anything?
Yeah, but whose responsibility is it?
It’s the fucking parents’ responsibility, that’s who. It’s not the school district’s problem to both try and teach these kids, and then turn around and treat the parents with kid gloves and bend over backwards to get them involved.
That’s the catch- people come up with a million excuses- language, comfort, confidence, etc… but when it’s all boiled down, if the parents really and truly gave a damn, they’d find a way to make it happen, and yet they don’t.
I respect human dignity by not confiscating the wages of people who are working hard to support themselves, not layabouts.
Do you have a serious rejoinder? Or do you just want to leave this at the level of duelling soundbites?
Ah. Irony.
Gold star for you! You got the joke, smartypants!
I am sympathetic to this point of view, because I more or less share it.
But that doesn’t mean schools shouldn’t do anything to increase parental involvement. In general I think they should be concerned with the whole child’s development, not merely whether they can add or know when the declaration of Independence was signed. Serving them reduced cost breakfast doesn’t teach them physics but it certainly helps their education.
That being said, I think currently some of the problem is that the school’s have consequences for students failing, and the parents don’t. (well, they may have the consequence of having their 25 year old kid living with them because he can’t get a job or go to college while being illiterate, but humans are notoriously bad at delayed consequences). This bill, however misguided (or not), tries to ensure that parents have consequences for their child’s failure just as the school has consequences.