That is what you’ll hear the leftist say about why public education is in such a sad state these last couple decades. Of course, this myth is fueled by the teacher’s unions so that they can get more money out of their membership so that they can elect more Democrats so that they can get more moeny.
It is a very ugly vicious circle and it revoloves around your wallet.
But alas, the federal Department of Education has given that circle some very complex geometry
Rural students perform better in science than their urban counterparts, and rural teachers generally are happy with their schools, a federal study finds.
This Education Department study provides a snapshot of what is happening in rural schools. In all, about a third of U.S. public schools are in rural areas. Generally, the Census Bureau considers areas with fewer than 500 people per square mile rural.
When it comes to achievement, the report released Wednesday finds science is a strong subject for rural students. That could be because kids get their education in real-world settings as well as classrooms, said Marty Strange, policy director of the Rural School and Community Trust, an advocacy group.
The report found:
• At all grade levels, rural students did better on national science tests than children in cities and performed about the same as suburban students.
• In math, rural kids did better than urban students at every grade level.
• Rural fourth- and eighth-graders read better than their urban peers. In high school, rural kids read about as well as kids in cities.
Among teachers, rural educators were more likely to report being satisfied with teaching conditions, though salaries are lower than elsewhere.
Rural schools tend to be smaller and have lower student-teacher ratios, which might explain why teachers say conditions are good there, Strange said.
Now, one could also use the excuse that rural students have better home lives and more supportive parents and are more well-behaved.
While that is all usually very true, there is one thing lacking in rural communities. The one thing that the National Education Association say matters most in a child’s education: Money.
Around 15% less per student than suburban and urban schools.
Let’s see the NEA chew on that one for a bit.
Something else the NEA doesn’t care to bring up, the larger the school district (LA) the worse the student performance. The smaller the school district (your rural areas and private schools) the better the kids do. It is speculated that parents care more because in a smaller district the feeling is that families have more of an influence than in larger districts.
Vouchers anyone?
Wildman7316