RECENT COMMENTS
Neighborhood schools are the poorest in the area
A Richmond Times-Dispatch article today connecting the dots between working in the state’s least-affluent schools and principal turn-over lists the “25 Least-affluent schools in Central Virginia”.
Five of the 25 poorest in Central Virginia are in the East End of Richmond (#2 Fairfield Court ES, #3 George Mason ES, #4 Woodville ES, #10 MLK MS, #15 Chimborazo ES). Martin Luther King Jr. Middle School is the least-affluent middle school in the state of Virginia. The only neighborhood elementary school not making the list is Bellevue ES.
At Chimborazo, 88 percent of the students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch — a leading national indicator of poverty — making the school the 15th poorest of the 276 public schools in the 20 localities in central Virginia.
Too bad we are not told how many of these kids have a cell phone, go home to a single parent (or no parent) household and spend the rest of the day watching a big flat screen tv.
Mark,
The truth is that most of them do go home to a single parent (or no parent). I would imagine you have a cell phone and big tv. What does it matter if they have a cell phone?
A survey of wireless carriers revealed that over 285 million Americans are mobile subscribers, about 91 percent of the total population. Does it seem ridiculous for even people of lower socio-economic standing to have a cell phone? Last time I checked you can buy one for a few ten-spots and pay the same for a monthly bill… just about everyone can front that.
I’d sooner a kid have a tv to watch or play games on than nothing to do but run the streets.
Do you have anything else classless and classist to say?
rps-teacher- I think you misinterpreted Mark’s comment. I don’t think he was saying that the households should have no TV, but rather that they shouldn’t have a 50-inch plasma TV. With the cell phones, I don’t think he was trying to say that the PARENTS shouldn’t have a cell phone (especially if it is their primary phone), but rather that it is extravagant for a CHILD to have a cell phone.
I honestly don’t know if many of these kids go home to that or not, but I do agree that if you can afford a huge fancy TV or if you can afford to give a cell phone to you child, then you clearly have some extra money and should be paying full-price for your child’s lunch.
Another question – is it a sign of misguided priorities that households are willing to pay extra to have a fancy cellphone but won’t pay for their kids lunch unless it is provided for them?
Were the positive things that were said about Principal Burke missed? As a former member of the PTA Board, I know that some of the children’s parents them in the school because of the extra things that are done for them. The children cannot control the choices that their parents and guardians make. Yes, this is troubling but it doesn’t change the reality of it.
@Alex–it’s the same misguided priorities that make people buy big houses and fancy cars and expensive clothing and all the other toys, but when you go into those nice big houses there’s no furniture and they’re eating peanut butter sandwiches for dinner. For way too many, image is everything regardless of income level. Kids these days are either special little snowflakes or afterthoughts.
MrsAlex, I don’t think anyone misinterpreted the comments made by Mark. They were classless, cynical and an outright insult to people. Kids all around the country have a cell phone. Rich kids, poor kids and middle income kids as well as their parents. Sometimes a cell phone is a link to the parent that is at work. I purchased a cell phone for $19 at walmart years ago and buy minutes for it. It is not a luxury item. It is a safety item. Your classist belief that a person with less income than you should not have any items of luxury or comfort is pure ignorance on your part. What is wrong with saving your money over months and years to buy one luxury item to have some enjoyment? You seem to think that people with low incomes should live in empty homes. No one is like that. Some people in America are poor but no the poorest on Earth. There is nothing wrong with having a plasma tv if you paid for it with your hard earned money. Stop judging because it is not your place-YOU are NOT GOD
So what you are saying is they should have a plasma tv paid for with their money while their kids eat for free with my money and the roof over their head is paid for with my money?
I have no problem how someone spends their money as long as they aren’t crying poverty to me when it comes to caring for their kids. Once they tell me I need to pay my money to pay for their kids, I think they lose the right to bitch about me criticizing their wasteful spending since it impacts me.
What size tv should they have in your opinion? Would a 24 size screen better suit your idea or should they have no tv at all? What no one here has mentioned is that many of these families work at min wage jobs. Some of my students come from families where both parents work min wage jobs and they still can’t afford to move out of public housing or out of the neighborhood at all. It is cheaper to have a cell phone than a landline, I can pick up a plasma tv on craigslist right now for $200 or rent one paying a weekly fee. Maybe these families accept charity or splurge on a xmas gift now and then. If I was working at a thankless min wage, trying to raise kids in a high crime neighborhood and a tv helped ensure they would stay indoors while I was as work, yeah I’d make it a priority. Just because someone may be able to buy a higher priced item on occassion and owns a cell phone doesn’t mean they are abusing the system by making sure their child gets a hot meal at school. Please don’t be so judgemental and think before you speak.