Rural Kids Outpace City Kids In Math, Science

[The Straight Story]

Rural Kids Outpace City Kids In Math, Science
Report Finds 4th-, 8th-Graders Read Better Than Urban Kids

WASHINGTON -- Rural students perform better in science than their urban counterparts, and rural teachers are generally happy with their schools, a federal study says.

While many education reports examine urban issues, this Education Department study provides a snapshot of what's happening in rural schools. In all, about a third of U.S. public schools are located in rural areas.

Generally, areas with fewer than 500 people per square mile are considered rural by the Census Bureau.

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, says Marty Strange, policy director of the Rural School and Community Trust, an advocacy group. "Rural life is a little closer to nature," he said.

http://www.local6.com/spotlight/13781147/detail.html

[DaveJ]

1. I don't buy the reason

IMO, the reason is there are a lot more distractions from academics in urban areas.

[gatorboy]

2. That's it. It's because we have more trees!

:eyes:

Perhaps it's the smaller classroom ratio?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. More parental involvement?

In a rural setting, the school is often the social center of the community. So parents are often more likely to go to school events, and to talk with teachers about their children. An interested parent can often ask a teacher or principal for extra materials for a kid who is interested in a special topic--the school is the only resource center in a wide radius. Also in a rural area, it is less common for both parents to work away from the home--there just aren't that many jobs. Around here, people are farmers, loggers, or truckers, so there is always at least one parent at home most of the time.

[happyslug]

4. That is the almost the same as in a study I read over 20 years ago,

Basically the greater the Parental input in a school, the better the School. One sign to look for was did the school have a PTA or a PTO. A Parent Teachers Association (PTA) MUST meet the requirements of the national PTA organization which wants Parental input. Parent Teachers organizations (PTO) have NO national organization and thus used by School that want to minimize Parental input. Thus a School with a PTA tends to be better than one with just a PTO. Bake sales are NOT a good or bad signs for Schools will use them for any purpose to raise money. The key is NOT bake sales or other money raising events, but input into HOW the teachers teach the Children. That is the key, do the Teachers talk to the parents? Is it a two way street? Do the Parents and Teacher talk more then the legal minimum? Those have to be answered YES for the school to be good.

Now a PTA by itself does NOT indicate a Good or Bad school, it is more a sign of a Good School, but the key is parental input. Rural Schools tend to have such parental input for the Schools tend to be Small. Often the Churches are involved with the schools, but as part of the overall education not religion.

The report I read pointed out a sign of a bad school, worse than having a PTO. That sign was if the School emphasized what its sport teams have done. I do not mean just mentioning the School won a Sport, but mentioning in excess of what the school teaches. Does the School think more of its Sports achievements then the number of people it graduates?

All Schools want to think of themselves as one. In school districts with good parent-Teacher relationships the emphasis is on the Open house and other meetings between the teachers and the Parents. In bad school districts the emphasis is on what the Foot ball team did. The reason for this is to have the students thinks they are one with the school. In good schools this is done by the Children, parents and Teachers working together. In Bad school districts it si unity behind the Football team.

[MissB]

5. Interesting study, which I think you've brought up before.

Our school doesn't do the PTA because we don't want parents to have to pay dues (not that money is an issue - it is just that the philosphy of the parents is that having a kid at the school gives one a right to voice ones opinion on how things should be). Our parental involvement is astoundingly high, and our school ranks in the top of the ridiculous NCLB categories.

I do wonder who authored the study. No offense, but it sounds like a PTA-sponsored study. :rofl:

[happyslug]

8. It was independent of the PTA, its main thrust was schools that emphasized Football

And other sports over academics. Furthermore while I have read subsequent reports that shows PTAs are a sign of a good school, the report I read actually ignored that issue and looked at parental input AND how much emphasis was Football (and other Sports). What caught my attention was that Sports and Academic were NOT exclusive of each other, emphasis of one or the other was (By Sports I mean the "Money Sports", Football and Basketball, the other sports do not seem to factor one way or the other).

My point as to the PTA was it is a sign the SCHOOL WANTS TO ENCOURAGE PARENTAL INPUT, and that is a more recent study I have red. The original study, I read over 20 years ago, concentrated on the issue of PARENTAL Input.

[MissB]

6. Small class sizes.

With fewer than 500 people per square mile, the number of kids per class is probably correspondingly small.

[Ezlivin]

7. Yeah, but the city kids have WiFi, Starbucks and iPhones!

Who needs Math or Science when you've got goodies like that?

While the rural kids are herding goats the city kids are chillin' to tunes on their iPods while text messaging their BFFs.

:sarcasm:

Or is it?