No Rich Child Left Behind

[butterflymommy]

The study on books in the house:

 

 

 

http://www.scienceda...00520213116.htm

 

 

I remember reading that study, but it's probably a chicken-egg situation. The families most passionate about learning will probably have more books. And if you dump a pile of books in an at-risk home, would you necessarily see the same effects as in the home where the books were organically part of the picture to begin with?

[Arcadia]

I don't think elites want to keep the gap wide. They simply want their children to do as well as possible. The competition among the elites themselves is creating the widening gap.

 

 

:iagree: I think typical parents will want the best for their children whether it is academic or otherwise.

 

My mom has seen kids come into K not knowing their own last name.

 

 

We forgot to teach both our boys how to write their last names as well as home address and home telephone number :laugh: Luckily their kindergarten teachers were understanding and they were not the only ones.

[Julie Smith]

And I've learned that MANY families don't talk and MANY couples don't talk. It is mind boggling to me, but I hear tell it is VERY common.

 

 

I know someone like this. I had never seen anything like that to the extreme she did it. I can't even explain or even think about the lack of basic very basic human conversation in that house directed at the kids. A house with both parents, and 1 to 2 grandparents.

[Scarlett]

:iagree: I think typical parents will want the best for their children whether it is academic or otherwise.

 

 

 

We forgot to teach both our boys how to write their last names as well as home address and home telephone number :laugh: Luckily their kindergarten teachers were understanding and they were not the only ones.

 

Ha! This made me laugh. Sadly some parents forget to teach everything!

[Julie Smith]

We forgot to teach both our boys how to write their last names as well as home address and home telephone number :laugh: Luckily their kindergarten teachers were understanding and they were not the only ones.

 

This reminds me of an old story.

 

Both parents spoke different languages. Daddy spoke French. Son ended up going to a French school. Turns out Daddy never used, so son never knew of the french words for things such as "broom, cloth, wash, soap, ..."

 

I once had to give a ride home to my cousins teen age son. It was going to be a 30 minute+ drive so I went to look up his address. He had lived in the house for almost 2 years. He didn't know the address. No house number, no street name. :huh: Happily he was able to give directions the whole way.

[Murphy101]

I remember reading that study, but it's probably a chicken-egg situation. The families most passionate about learning will probably have more books. And if you dump a pile of books in an at-risk home, would you necessarily see the same effects as in the home where the books were organically part of the picture to begin with?

 

I don't know about the same effects, but I know my family wouldn't have ever owned books in the home if it hadn't been for me skipping lunch to use the money to buy those scholastic books every other week. Frankly, those book orders were the only thing I didn't hate about school. To this day, I still remember the first chapter book I ever read. (Boris and Olga the guinea pigs had the best of lives IMO! ) The idea that I could enter another world, just by opening a book completely rocked my concept of what my world could be.

 

:iagree: I think typical parents will want the best for their children whether it is academic or otherwise.

We forgot to teach both our boys how to write their last names as well as home address and home telephone number :laugh: Luckily their kindergarten teachers were understanding and they were not the only ones.

 

I didn't know my FIRST name in kindergarten. No one had ever called me by it and no one did again until high school and even then it was rare. LOL

 

And one of my kids learned to read without learning the alphabet song. His grandmother came over and asked if he knew his ABCs and the ABC song. And that was the moment I learned I'd never bother to teach that. We just jumped right in with vowel and then added consonants. No mention of the ABCs or songs. Just vowels and consonants. *shame faced*

[kitten18]

 

 

 

Your post reminds me of my ds13, who from the time he was 4 would spend HOURS outside playing imaginary games. (he still does it but don't tell him I told you so) If you watch him from the window he appears to be a bit touched in the head, but he is having a good ole time just him and his imagination. His dad, my XH, used to watch him and say sadly, 'poor kid, he needs some friends'. Uh, no, he doesn't he is fine. He has a great imagination why be sorry for him?

My nephew is 33 and he still plays imaginary games, only as an adult it's called Civil War Reenacting. :)

When we go to his ranch in the summer he loves to set up scavenger hunts and adventures for my kids.

[Crimson Wife]

My mom has seen kids come into K not knowing their own last name.

 

I just asked my 4 1/2 y.o. DD to tell me her "full name".

 

Her response? "[first name that begins with a "G"] Goo". :tongue_smilie:

[Word Nerd]

One thing that I have not seen anyone mention explicitly, the real elephant in the room is popular culture. Middle class kids use most of their intelligence on memorizing sports statistics, lines from movies, and popular song lyrics. Those things will never raise your test scores or help you later in life.

 

Intelligence isn't a zero-sum game. People know those things because they enjoy music, sports, and movies or TV shows. It's not like your brain is going to run out of space to learn something else unless you delete the file where your mind keeps the lyrics for Ho Hey or I Will Wait. The smartest people I know have a lot of trivial knowledge as well as academic knowledge. And almost all are also geeky about at least one aspect of pop culture.

[SKL]

Intelligence isn't a zero-sum game. People know those things because they enjoy music, sports, and movies or TV shows. It's not like your brain is going to run out of space to learn something else unless you delete the file where your mind keeps the lyrics for Ho Hey or I Will Wait. The smartest people I know have a lot of trivial knowledge as well as academic knowledge. And almost all are also geeky about at least one aspect of pop culture.

 

I recall my brother's write-up in his employer's newsletter years ago. He was identified as the resident repository of Star Trek knowledge and some other thing. LOL. He's very intelligent and has lived and breathed computers since he was a young teen. But yeah, Star Trek. ... I would consider myself to have been middle class (if not lower) as a teen, and I was pretty intelligent and knowledgeable. So I remembered the songs that played on the radio; that doesn't mean I didn't memorize my entire Biology textbook too. I don't understand how anyone can make a generalization about "middle class people" when that includes most Americans. Middle class people run the gamut of intellectual interests.

[butterflymommy]

My mom has seen kids come into K not knowing their own last name.

 

 

There was an article about a local school in my local paper, and one teacher was quoted as saying some kids only knew their nickname (like booboo or honey) and not their real first name entering K. It's difficult for me to wrap my head around that one... wouldn't it occur to the parent to explain the legal name to the child before entering the building?

[LisaKinVA]

There was an article about a local school in my local paper, and one teacher was quoted as saying some kids only knew their nickname (like booboo or honey) and not their real first name entering K. It's difficult for me to wrap my head around that one... wouldn't it occur to the parent to explain the legal name to the child before entering the building?

 

 

Well...according to my 4yo, her "nick name" is her legal (real) name (I can't convince her otherwise...and it's just not worth the fighting or melt down. I'm hoping she'll grow out of it, but then, she doesn't want to grow up either. :p)

[*lifeoftheparty*]

.

[MomtoCandJ]

Heck I'm still trying to teach dd that when some one asks what her name is, she can just say her first name Cali. Not her whole name.

Headstart really depends on the resources they have. Dd's program doesn't have any grants to supplement what the Feds provide so they don't have many resources. I, as chairperson for the parent group have tried to get grants but because they are in with the local school, they don't qualify for some. Other area programs have grants to help with providing other resources. The next town over has more resources to teach letter sounds so those children are more prepared for K. Some also have iPads that they have received with grant money. Headstart works best for those who put the effort into doing the activities with thier children. There have been parent meetings where I'm the only one there. So yeah a lot of Headstart outcomes depend on parent involvement.

[Meriwether]

There was an article about a local school in my local paper, and one teacher was quoted as saying some kids only knew their nickname (like booboo or honey) and not their real first name entering K. It's difficult for me to wrap my head around that one... wouldn't it occur to the parent to explain the legal name to the child before entering the building?

 

My mom was named after her mother. The family called her Honey since she was tiny. She knew she had a different name, but it was still disorienting to be called something else. Her siblings and classmates still called her Honey. Only the teacher called her anything else. As an adult she goes by a nickname of her real name, but when we go back to PA everyone still calls her Hon or Honey. Mom is pushing 70 and her mom, siblings, my cousins (who never lived near her), church friends, schoolmates, etc. all call her Hon or Honey.

[Dmmetler]

Well...according to my 4yo, her "nick name" is her legal (real) name (I can't convince her otherwise...and it's just not worth the fighting or melt down. I'm hoping she'll grow out of it, but then, she doesn't want to grow up either. :p)

 

 

At age 2-3, I had several difficult talks with Sunday School teachers and church nursery workers because if they wrote my DD's name "wrong" on her nametag, DD would melt down because she didn't have one. That included her full, legal name. If it wasn't spelled that exact way, it wasn't her. Period.

 

 

She did know it by kindergarten, but there was one boy in her class, who, when the principal announced "Thomas James" to get his certificate at the end of the year graduation program, just sat there until his classmates said "TJ, that's you!". And this was in a parochial school where parents were paying tuition (not high tuition by private school standards, but it still meant middle class kids).

[Dmmetler]

I always wondered why kids needed to learn to count, since the childhood games all include counting. How do you play hide-n-seek without counting to ten? Hopscotch? Jacks? Around here, urban poverty children do not play games at home..that's something they do at boys and girls club once they are school age. Their activities are in line with Ruby Payne's observations...check her book out if you haven't, it is interesting.

 

If there is no cup or only one cup, no need to distinguish between cups by any attribute. Shirts though, sometimes they have two colors, but mama seems to do everything for the child, including dressing well past the age other cultures have transitioned the child to independence. It was quite common at our diverse church based preschool for the teachers to have to teach 3 yr olds how to put a coat on as well as use the zipper.

 

Setting the table is not done. Children don't eat at the same time as the adults, so there is no one plate for daddy, one plate for mommy, one plate for me, one glass for daddy...etc to learn one to one correspondence.

 

There is no structure to the day, so beginning/middle/end and sequencing is brand new when it's taught in LA in K-3.

 

The use of knives is interesting. My SIL (poverty) screamed when she saw my then four year old with a butter knife, using it competently. She viewed him as extremely dangerous. Come to find out her children at age 7 were not allowed to touch any knife...they were being taught ways to kill with hand to hand, and a knife was reserved for a later age. Meanwhile mine is calmly buttering his roll. Turns out knives are only used as weapons against humans in their home, while in mine a knife is used in the quest for dinner, and proper handling techniques are taught (no toadsticking, no use on humans, safety circle).

 

On the games, in the urban neighborhood I taught in, kids weren't playing games like hopscotch or tag because it wasn't safe for them to be outside, and responsible parents didn't let their kids go out and play. They also weren't learning to pedal tricycles, throw balls (unless there was an older brother who taught the skill inside-some of the little boys did have the toy basketball hoops over the door or something like that), or pump swings. They simply didn't learn such things until they went to pre-K or kindergarten. It's a lot easier to learn playground games when you're in a community where kids of various ages go outside and interact-or when you go to preschool/daycare starting at an early age with two working parents, and have a daycare staff that, at the same age,were playing outside with neighborhood kids and therefore TEACH their young charges said games.

 

FWIW, I did have an experience recently where I went to a birthday party for one of DD's friends. The parents had put together a dance playlist for the kids, and while many of the kids knew ALL the songs on the various dance games on the Wii or Kinect (you could definitely tell the kids of the "limited or no screen time" parents!), only my DD and the PS kids knew the Chicken Dance and the bunny hop. DD knew them because I had her in music and movement classes in her preschool years. The PS kids knew them from PE class or "brain breaks" in school. The HSed kids didn't have a clue.

 

 

I have a love/hate relationship with Ruby Payne-as an inner city teacher, I went through book clubs and video discussions of her work in at least 3 schools. On one hand, many of her observations are spot on. On the other, she's so darned condescending, and the picture she paints really comes down to "you can't do better than your social class". I like Lisa Delphit better-and her advice is far more useful if you want to actually work with the kids and families.

[catz]

There was an article about a local school in my local paper, and one teacher was quoted as saying some kids only knew their nickname (like booboo or honey) and not their real first name entering K. It's difficult for me to wrap my head around that one... wouldn't it occur to the parent to explain the legal name to the child before entering the building?

 

 

Meh - the name thing specifically doesn't bother me much. My son could do fraction math in kindergarten but could never remember his middle name or his address. He is not a "memorizer". He remembers stuff when it has a practical (and preferably interesting) application. I'm pretty sure his younger sister knew our home address by heart about the same time he did, and she's almost 4 years younger. If he would have had a nickname like "TJ", he would have been the kid sitting there when they called his name.

[MBM]

Paul Tough wrote a book explaining reasons why the rich perform better than the poor in his book How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character (Amazon link). Some of the reviews do a good job summarizing the main points of the book. I think it's well worth reading.

 

I'd also recommend Madeline Levine's book The Price of Privilege: How Parental Pressure and Material Advantage are Creating a Generation of Disconnected and Unhappy Kids. Here's a sentence that sums it up from Amazon's book description:

 

Materialism, pressure to achieve, perfectionism, and disconnection are combining to create a perfect storm that is devastating children of privilege and their parents alike.

 

So even though rich kids might do well academically, it doesn't mean their lives are without problems.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

One thing that I have not seen anyone mention explicitly, the real elephant in the room is popular culture. Middle class kids use most of their intelligence on memorizing sports statistics, lines from movies, and popular song lyrics. Those things will never raise your test scores or help you later in life. They are seen as valuable skills in mainstream America today. It is the biggest battle I have fought for my kids education and I may have lost it. I lost it with my oldest, and I'm fighting tooth and nail with my younger two. My son believes with all his heart that being good at games like Minecraft are not wasted time. He has a very high IQ, but he only has a 2.8 GPA in college because he NEVER does homework. He can get a 2.8 by showing up and taking tests, giving speeches, ect with no prep. His WTM education gave him enough of an edge to pull that off. Younger dd believes that being a Selena Gomez fan is important. My dh will not support me in unplugging the kids and so there it is. My kids are as smart or smarter than any wealthy kids I know, but they have watched more television than they should have and I limit TV more than any other non home schooling mother that I know, so what mainstream kids watch must be truly over the top.

 

 

So wealthy kids are not into pop culture? Are you sure about that?

[Word Nerd]

 

So wealthy kids are not into pop culture? Are you sure about that?

 

Nor, apparently, are non-Americans. Somebody better tell Psy.

[SKL]

About knowledge entering KG: I remember the KG teacher asking me my name on the first day. I hesitated, because while I knew my "real name," nobody ever called me that except when I'd been naughty. I wasn't sure I wanted to be called my naughty name all year. LOL. I didn't get off on the right foot in KG, needless to say. .... As far as colors and such, please remember that not all kids see things the same way. Aside from colorblindness, there are kids like mine who get confused because they can't see very well at all. I couldn't understand my dd's inconsistency with colors until the day she got her first glasses (almost 3yo). She then saw a traffic light for the first time and excitedly named the colors without prompting. It had not occurred to me that she could only see well enough to distinguish colors if the object was right in her face. My kid also took a long time to learn letters and numbers, because of vision problems that were resolved with vision therapy. Unfortunately not all parents even know VT exists, let alone have the resources to pay for it. My dd entered KG on par with her peers, but only because she'd had thousands of out-of-pocket dollars spent on her vision. I sure wish more kids had access to those services. .... Another point is that some kids have had changes to their name, especially their last name (due to changes in parental relationships, custody, etc), so they might be understandably confused. I've seen this when I was a reading tutor. ... And then there are conditions such as sickle cell anemia that affect black populations and have a significant impact on school performance. Even untreated ear infections can make a big difference. .... In short, I would not jump to the conclusion that parents are just lazy in cases like that. I'd push hard to get these kids some evaluations and services as early as possible to hopefully turn things around.

[J-rap]

I don't know if I can put my thoughts into words, but I'll try. I think more than anything it has to do with the attitude of the parents. If the parents have the attitude of setting goals, ambition, carrying through with a project, curiosity, asking questions and seeking answers, creativity... this type of environment is even more important than preschools or other extra curricular activities that require money.

 

I can see first-hand in our community, where there is only one of everything and everyone has the opportunity to do the same thing (the community/schools offer scholarships to those who can't afford it), the attitudes of the parents is sometimes all that keeps the children from taking advantage of opportunities, or pushing a little harder in the things that they do.

 

But how you address that problem, I don't know. I suppose it is an attitude that is passed down from generation to generation, and they have not had the opportunity to know and understand a different way of thinking about things and children and life in general. I don't know how you address that. I don't know how you break that cycle, except to maybe talk about it with the youngest generation of those families, building it into their education or something.

[Wildcat]

. 

 

[MistyMountain]

It was quite common at our diverse church based preschool for the teachers to have to teach 3 yr olds how to put a coat on as well as use the zipper.

 

My son couldn't put on his coat at 3. He can now at 4 but he can't zipper it. He dresses himself but the task takes forever and it might look to a teacher like he can't do it at all. He is good with gross motor stuff and was riding a 2 wheel pedal bike before he turned 3 but he has a harder time with fine motor tasks. He still can't write or draw much at all.

[Murphy101]

 

 

My son couldn't put on his coat at 3. He can now at 4 but he can't zipper it. He dresses himself but the task takes forever and it might look to a teacher like he can't do it at all. He is good with gross motor stuff and was riding a 2 wheel pedal bike before he turned 3 but he has a harder time with fine motor tasks. He still can't write or draw much at all.

 

Which is very much normal development of a 3-4 year old boy and a teacher should not be surprised by it.

 

And cheaper clothes are not known for quality fit or zippers. A richer kid might have it easier simply bc mom can afford to only buy what is easy for him to wear and buy it new each year. Many a poorer kid just doesn't have that option.

[catz]

My son couldn't put on his coat at 3. He can now at 4 but he can't zipper it. He dresses himself but the task takes forever and it might look to a teacher like he can't do it at all. He is good with gross motor stuff and was riding a 2 wheel pedal bike before he turned 3 but he has a harder time with fine motor tasks. He still can't write or draw much at all.

 

For little boys, I don't think this is unusual at all. Not that some boys aren't small motor focused. My dd could stack 12 small square blocks at 9 months. My son was still being corrected on how to hold a pencil when he went to kindergarten. Same boy at 6th grade is doing algebra 2 and pretty much tests at a high school level or higher across the boards. I just don't think some of these individual young kid skills are necessarily big flashing red lights for a kid that has an unengaged parent. Bundling up for winter was definitely one of the skills both of our preschools worked on (both my kids did attend preschool). At age 12, my kid still barely wants to wear a coat when it's cold.

 

It's the kid that is behind on many or all preschool skills that is really going to struggle and pay all the way through. I don't think there's necessarily an easy way to tell if a kid has engaged parents or if a kid is just developing their skills at a different rate than another kid. If I would have had my girl first, I probably would have thought there was something wrong with my boy. He's just fine!

[SKL]

Being able to zip, tie, etc. can also be related to vision. I really wish all incoming KG kids could get a developmental vision screening, and I wish they worked on vision-developing exercises in KG. It's such a common problem yet so often not addressed as early as it should be. ... As for independence, I would think it would be similar across the board, as people of all income levels seem equally likely to do things for their kids vs. have the patience to watch them do it themselves. In my observation, my kids were years ahead of others in some self-help skills simply because other moms aren't in a hurry to teach them. You can buy Velcro etc.; in fact, I had to go online to find shoes with laces for preschoolers. On the other hand, the reason my kids wear jumpers is that I'm too lazy to enforce "tuck in your shirt" as diligently as I should. :p

[butterflymommy]

 

So wealthy kids are not into pop culture? Are you sure about that?

 

 

I don't know if you've ever looked at the Rich Kids of Instagram, but brain cells don't appear to be their forte.

 

Of course the stupid ones are likely the ones plastering their pictures for the world to see.

[Anne in CA]

 

So wealthy kids are not into pop culture? Are you sure about that?

My only persona experience with wealthy children (which is limited but I do have some) is that they do not indulge in pop culture or watching professional sports the way my own children do. The book Coming Apart also said that, but my own limited experience and that book are what I am basing that thought on.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I tutored in the inner city at one time. One of my students wanted me to help him with his driver's ed book. He did not know the word "intersection" (he could decode it but didn't know it's meaning). Obviously he was surrounded by intersections. This was just one example of the basic words he did not know. Working on reading comprehension was a nightmare because he didn't have the language stored that would make anything we read comprehensible. The home I taught in had no books or magazines or even pictures on the walls. It did, however, have a t.v. in every single room in the house. Which made me wonder what they watched because I would expect some basic vocabulary to come from listening to the t.v. even if you didn't have the printed word to compare it to. I actually enjoyed teaching these kids but had to discontinue because more than half the time the kids didn't show up to the sessions.

[briansmama]

Maybe I am just reading too much into this, but isn't anyone else disturbed by the fact that the gap lessens during the school year? To me, this means that no matter what you do in the summer or how much you prepare your students ahead of time, the ps is the great equalizer. It looks like the kids who went in higher didn't get what they needed to stay challenged. As a Mom of gifted children, that would worry me.

 

 

I agree.

 

 

[Heathermomster]

Exactly.

 

Plus, I don't know how it works in all school districts, but don't the schools in the higher-income areas (and thus more revenue from property taxes) get better funding?

 

 

Actually, money from my district leaves the county to support the rest of the state. Also, with less free lunch comes less federal tax dollars.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

My only persona experience with wealthy children (which is limited but I do have some) is that they do not indulge in pop culture or watching professional sports the way my own children do. The book Coming Apart also said that, but my own limited experience and that book are what I am basing that thought on.

 

Wealthy children can be, like most kids, very different. The ones I know and have known certainly watched (and even played!) sports and followed pop culture.

[MistyMountain]

For little boys, I don't think this is unusual at all. Not that some boys aren't small motor focused. My dd could stack 12 small square blocks at 9 months. My son was still being corrected on how to hold a pencil when he went to kindergarten. Same boy at 6th grade is doing algebra 2 and pretty much tests at a high school level or higher across the boards. I just don't think some of these individual young kid skills are necessarily big flashing red lights for a kid that has an unengaged parent. Bundling up for winter was definitely one of the skills both of our preschools worked on (both my kids did attend preschool). At age 12, my kid still barely wants to wear a coat when it's cold.

 

It's the kid that is behind on many or all preschool skills that is really going to struggle and pay all the way through. I don't think there's necessarily an easy way to tell if a kid has engaged parents or if a kid is just developing their skills at a different rate than another kid. If I would have had my girl first, I probably would have thought there was something wrong with my boy. He's just fine!

 

I am not worried about him too much. He still has a year before kindergarten and is actually doing great with academic stuff. He can understand things meant for much older kids and has a great memory for details. I never taught him to add but he is starting to add. He can count to 100, skip count and is beginning to read. He isn't fluent yet but I think he might be right on the verge. He uses advanced vocabulary and can talk in great detail about stuff. He has an articulation delay but he is making great progress in speech therapy. He even knows his full name that he never goes by but not his address ;) I wish he could write because it would be helpful now that we are working on math and spelling but at least he has a year before school. I have a feeling that will be an area he struggles with.

[Crimson Wife]

My only persona experience with wealthy children (which is limited but I do have some) is that they do not indulge in pop culture or watching professional sports the way my own children do. The book Coming Apart also said that, but my own limited experience and that book are what I am basing that thought on.

 

This has not been my experience. There may be some class differences in the particular sports (sailing & tennis vs. NASCAR & bowling), but I know tons of sports nuts who grew up wealthy.

[TravelingChris]

I read Coming Apart and though I admit it was a few years ago, I don't remember anything about the upper classes not liking sports. I remember that it said that certain sports (or sort of sports) are not watched by them-== WWF and Nascar, are the two I remember being mentioned. And that is true, as far as my experience. None of the people I have lived near mentioned watching either of those sports. We were so oblivious to Nascar that we have run into unexpected traffic jams. After we did that the second time in two different states years apart, now we know to check Nascar racing schedules before traveling.

[Crimson Wife]

We were so oblivious to Nascar that we have run into unexpected traffic jams. After we did that the second time in two different states years apart, now we know to check Nascar racing schedules before traveling.

 

Glad to know that I'm not the only one. Though TBH, we also naively took a spontaneous trip to Monterey the weekend of some big golf tournament at Pebble Beach and couldn't find a hotel anywhere in the area. So I'm equally oblivious to highbrow and lowbrow sports :lol:

[SKL]

LOL about the sports. My family (workin' class) loved football. We lived and breathed football. I never watched baseball or basketball, and had no experience whatsoever with golf or tennis. When I was 27 I took a job in a "professional services" firm and I was completely unable to hold a conversation, because all anyone ever talked about was basketball. Then the annual company picnic was an all-day golf outing - but you could opt for tennis if you preferred. Attendance was required. I was placed on a golf foursome where I learned how to hold a golf club for the first time. The managing partner was on the foursome behind me. Good thing I was a natural, LOL. I hated that job! ;) PS, none of this has anything to do with my education or intelligence, both of which were higher than the majority of my colleagues. :)

[Laurie4b]

Wealthier families tend to have more parental education - so often a richer language environment in the home. Wealthier families tend to have better medical care starting with prenatal care and then through a child's lilfe. Wealthier families tend to have more access and exposure to cultural activities. It's not that you can't do any of these things on a very tight budget but if parents are working to make ends meet they often don't have time. And doing things on a budget takes even more time than just handing over your credit card. So there are big disparities way before the start of kindergarten and even something like Head Start which doesn't even the gap.

 

 

The language issue is huge. As far as wealth or not, wealth is correlated with education level of the parent and educated parents talk oceans more than people on with lower levels of education. And they talk in interactive ways. That starts at birth, maybe even before.

[Parrothead]

 

Glad to know that I'm not the only one. Though TBH, we also naively took a spontaneous trip to Monterey the weekend of some big golf tournament at Pebble Beach and couldn't find a hotel anywhere in the area. So I'm equally oblivious to highbrow and lowbrow sports :lol:

 

 

I though everyone knew those with money prefer F1 racing. :laugh: The United States Grand Prix will be in November in Austin if anyone is interested. ;)

[ElizabethB]

I don't know about that. It's a chicken egg issue. If most of what we grade IQ on is reading based knowledge, then literacy is going to go hand in hand with IQ.

 

Yet I wager necessity being the mother of ingenuity, that if we could remove the literacy factor in how an IQ is evaluated, we would be surprised at the result.

 

 

Actually, unlike the cheap knock-off tests you can do on your own, the IQ tests used in studies do not have a written element, the literacy factor has already been removed. They are given orally. I have a friend who showed me the types of sections on an IQ test and explained how the tests were given after I mentioned the strong correlation between literacy and earnings. (My original thoughts were along your lines, that poor readers could not read and understand the questions on the IQ test but good readers could.)

 

So, IQ tests and literacy tests are actually measuring truly separate things influencing earnings since the IQ tests are not based on reading ability.

[wapiti]

Actually, unlike the cheap knock-off tests you can do on your own, the IQ tests used in studies do not have a written element, the literacy factor has already been removed. They are given orally. I have a friend who showed me the types of sections on an IQ test and explained how the tests were given after I mentioned the strong correlation between literacy and earnings. (My original thoughts were along your lines, that poor readers could not read and understand the questions on the IQ test but good readers could.)

 

So, IQ tests and literacy tests are actually measuring truly separate things influencing earnings since the IQ tests are not based on reading ability.

 

 

This is definitely true. I'll add, however, that there is a language processing element to IQ tests - I think this is about processing ability rather than language exposure - though I also know that some types of language processing deficits can be remediated or improved with therapy (a type of exposure?). So, I wonder whether underdeveloped language processing can affect at least the measurement of IQ and, in the long run, possibly ability itself. (Am I making any sense? coffee not kicking in here yet...)

[ElizabethB]

This is definitely true. I'll add, however, that there is a language processing element to IQ tests - I think this is about processing ability rather than language exposure - though I also know that language processing deficits can be remediated with therapy (a type of exposure?). So, I'd guess that underdeveloped language processing can affect at least the measurement of IQ and, in the long run, possibly ability itself. (Am I making any sense? coffee not kicking in here yet...)

 

 

You are making sense. Some of the things they are measuring are hard to understand and describe to the layperson outside of the field. (That layperson would definitely include me in this case!)

[Murphy101]

Yes I meant what wapiti said.

 

It's not that the test itself requires advanced reading skills.

 

It's that the intelligencd it evaluates are closely related to literacy. So close that I question whether the literary component could be removed.

[SKL]

Hmm, totally OT, but does anyone else think that IQ tests that rely heavily on listening/talking are biased against people who read better than they listen?

[wapiti]

Hmm, totally OT, but does anyone else think that IQ tests that rely heavily on listening/talking are biased against people who read better than they listen?

 

 

I do know that some particular tests end up having more auditory processing mixed in with what should be more purely intelligence. I vaguely recall that this is a known issue with the WJ-Cognitive, for example. The WISC separates things out more, but language processing issues - which are different(?) from auditory processing - definitely can interfere in the Verbal Comprehension section (IME). The trouble is that input and output are necessary for the testing, one way or another.

 

The SB-5 may be an interesting option - I think I read somewhere that it's more visual.

[Aelwydd]

My humble opinion:

 

Elite schools, which tend to attract and retain high proportions of wealthy-born children, teach their children to be leaders, teach them advanced business concepts, emphasize a global perspective, and give their children the very best in terms of resources. Resources include more educated teachers, smaller student-to-teach ratios, better libraries, better facilities, access to varied activities and study abroad. These kids are expected to fill in for the elite, at the best law firms, as CEOs of hospitals and companies, or government leaders, etc.

 

Middle-to-upper-middle class school districts are meant to serve those children whose communities are made up mostly of folks making anywhere from 80K to 225k. These schools emphasize excellence at math, writing, and above all a disciplined approach that rewards ambition. These kids are aimed towards corporate management jobs, engineer firms, high paid consultants, physicians, and so forth.

 

Working class-to-middle school districts make up the majority of schools in the U.S., and their purpose is to mold this generation into complaint workers for the "factory" that is the nation's work engine. They are meant learn to accept authority, and to realize that any group or individual that steps out to far or breaks the rules gets heavily penalized, or even gets "fired" (that is, expelled) from the school, usually to one of the "special" high schools meant for "problem kids." The future for most of these graduates is maybe state school, or a vocational career, lots of service jobs, secretary, various "tech" positions such as IT, teachers, plumbers, etc. They are not meant to be the rule makers, but to be tax producers for the majority of the system.

 

Below that are poor school districts, wherein many graduates seem to be mostly destined for unemployment/underemployment, low-paid minimum wage jobs, or prison. The U.S. has millions of prisoners, and these prisoners actually serve an important economic purpose--basically slave labor for an increasing number of privately owned prisons. Corporations have been purchasing state prisons for years now for the purpose of putting prisoners to work for cents on the dollar, and these companies make money off of these prisoners' slave labor. In case anyone is unaware of the Constitutional legality of this venture, please review the 14th Amendment, where it clearly states prison labor as an exception to slave labor. So, private companies are legally profiting off of forced labor. Also, as a large number of prisoners are felons, they also disenfranchised, so they have no legislative voice anymore.

 

So, to answer the OP, of course the "rich" are not left behind. The system as it is set up is serving its purpose, which is to create a hierarchal society, where the education and knowledge of history and law and everything in between is quite a different animal from what is taught in most middle class school districts. While upward mobility is possible, it is difficult, as education, itself, is considered the "great equalizer." So, when education, itself, is inherently unequal, it makes it exceedingly difficult for a child given lesser tools of knowledge to be able to scale the heights that separate him or her from much more privileged children.

[Merry]

Do you think that homeschooling makes it a little easier for the kids from the lower classes to move up to the elite class if the parents give them the same kind of education the elites get? Is classical education the elite education? I myself think that the classical education is only part of the whole elite culture though. Money plays a big part too and the background of the family/neighborhood.