Braylon Edwards pledging $1 million to fund scholarships (1 Viewer)

[patrickmcgroin]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?i...e=ESPNHeadlines

Associated Press

Updated: May 15, 2007, 9:10 AM ET

CLEVELAND -- Browns wide receiver Braylon Edwards has pledged $1 million in college scholarships for students in the city who keep at least a 2.5 grade point average through high school.

Edwards

Edwards' foundation is choosing 100 eighth-graders from the city's 58,000-student district for the program, which will include mentoring and tutoring. The students will also volunteer for 15 hours of community service each year and will not be allowed unexcused absences, the Browns said in a statement.

Edwards is scheduled to announce the program on Wednesday, along with the 100 students and Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, at Lincoln-West High School.

The program follows Edwards' decision last year to donate $500,000 to the University of Michigan, where Edwards played from 2001-2004, to create a scholarship endowment for football players.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press

 

[PsychoMan]

very very very cool

 

[The Shizzle]

He talked about that on NFL Radio Network (Sirius) last week. I only caught a few minutes of the interview, but I was very impressed. I've never known anything about him. He sounds like he a real good role model for those kids. It's good to hear these stories about NFL Players. Good Stuff.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

definitely seems like a good guy. At the draft he got swamped by kids and fans and took the time to sign every autograph, shake every hand, talk to everyone. I was impressed.

 

[BigRed]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

"" is rightFYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.Personally I think $10K would've been plenty though [/vick]

 

[PsychoMan]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

this is true. some kids really have to work their butts off to get these kinds of grades. he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

 

[Phurfur]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

 

[PsychoMan]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

i admit i was exagerating a bit but kids in rich communities in schools that get a lot more funding do better in school than kids that work just as hard in low income areas in schools with less funding

 

[stbugs]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

i admit i was exagerating a bit but kids in rich communities in schools that get a lot more funding do better in school than kids that work just as hard in low income areas in schools with less funding

Any link on this? Pretty sure my mom teaches in a very, very low income area and they get way more funding per student that the suburbs. If you have any link, I might believe you, but I think that the parental involvement/school environments in the "rich" areas tend to be a lot more conducive to learning and those cost exactly $0.I am pretty sure that everything I remember reading showed that inner cities tended to have higher per pupil costs than suburbs. I am very willing to say that I am wrong, but I don't believe that what you said is correct.

By the way, kudos to Edwards. As someone mentioned above, there are other athletes making way more than Edwards that don't donate that much money. My mom has reached into her own pocket probably more than the average NFL/NBA/MLB player to help the "poor" students that think of them as role models, and she does it on a teacher's salary.

 

[trader jake]

to Braylon Edwards

We spend so much time discussing the police blotter...it's cool to read more of these stories.

 

[PsychoMan]

i admit i was exagerating a bit but kids in rich communities in schools that get a lot more funding do better in school than kids that work just as hard in low income areas in schools with less funding

Any link on this? Pretty sure my mom teaches in a very, very low income area and they get way more funding per student that the suburbs. If you have any link, I might believe you, but I think that the parental involvement/school environments in the "rich" areas tend to be a lot more conducive to learning and those cost exactly $0.I am pretty sure that everything I remember reading showed that inner cities tended to have higher per pupil costs than suburbs. I am very willing to say that I am wrong, but I don't believe that what you said is correct.

i've found a couple links that support exactly what i'm talking about but they're fairly old websites. i'll see if i can find a more up to date one. do you have a link that shows how schools in low income areas with less funding produce better students (better grades)? that sounds like more of an outrageous claim than my own ... are we talking about the same thing here?

 

[JohnDoe]

Last April Braylon donated $500,000 to the Michigan Athletic Department to endow a scholarship.

April 18, 2006

Braylon Edwards donates $500,000 to Athletics

ANN ARBOR, Mich.—Former University of Michigan football standout and current Cleveland Browns wide receiver Braylon Edwards made history on Friday evening (April 14), announcing a $500,000 gift to create a scholarship endowment for the Athletic Department at the Junge Family Champions Center.

The gift is the largest pledged to the department by a current professional athlete and links the Braylon Edwards Foundation to the No. 1 jersey. The new endowment will be awarded to the Michigan football player who wears the No. 1 jersey. If no player currently wears the No. 1 jersey then the award will be granted to another player who exhibits exceptional off-field behavior and conducts himself as a team player.

Edwards, the 2004 Biletnikoff Award winner, used the evening's event to announce the endowment and pay tribute to the original No. 1 at Michigan, Anthony Carter, a three-time All-American and the player who made the jersey the most coveted in Wolverine football history. Edwards credits Carter, who was a former teammate of his father, Stan, for providing him with a role model and for being a pioneer in Michigan's wide receiving game.

Edwards also funded the scholarship to give back to the University of Michigan for fostering his talents into first-round draft pick quality and for providing him with a valuable education. Acknowledging his appreciation for his experiences at Michigan, Edwards said that the scholarship is in part a gesture of thanks to the University for values he learned and for a degree which would have allowed him to be successful regardless of his illustrious football career.

Link

 

[pizzatyme]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

i admit i was exagerating a bit but kids in rich communities in schools that get a lot more funding do better in school than kids that work just as hard in low income areas in schools with less funding

Any link on this? Pretty sure my mom teaches in a very, very low income area and they get way more funding per student that the suburbs. If you have any link, I might believe you, but I think that the parental involvement/school environments in the "rich" areas tend to be a lot more conducive to learning and those cost exactly $0.I am pretty sure that everything I remember reading showed that inner cities tended to have higher per pupil costs than suburbs. I am very willing to say that I am wrong, but I don't believe that what you said is correct.

By the way, kudos to Edwards. As someone mentioned above, there are other athletes making way more than Edwards that don't donate that much money. My mom has reached into her own pocket probably more than the average NFL/NBA/MLB player to help the "poor" students that think of them as role models, and she does it on a teacher's salary.

Wow! Ever heard of ..."time is money"? I wonder if a well to do parent has more free time on their hands to offer "zero-cost parental involvement" due to not having to work a second or part-time job to make ends meet?These blanket statements about kids and opportunities are just killing me!

 

[stbugs]

i admit i was exagerating a bit but kids in rich communities in schools that get a lot more funding do better in school than kids that work just as hard in low income areas in schools with less funding

Any link on this? Pretty sure my mom teaches in a very, very low income area and they get way more funding per student that the suburbs. If you have any link, I might believe you, but I think that the parental involvement/school environments in the "rich" areas tend to be a lot more conducive to learning and those cost exactly $0.I am pretty sure that everything I remember reading showed that inner cities tended to have higher per pupil costs than suburbs. I am very willing to say that I am wrong, but I don't believe that what you said is correct.

i've found a couple links that support exactly what i'm talking about but they're fairly old websites. i'll see if i can find a more up to date one. do you have a link that shows how schools in low income areas with less funding produce better students (better grades)? that sounds like more of an outrageous claim than my own ... are we talking about the same thing here?

Nope, not saying less funding produces better grades. I am saying that better schools in "rich" areas spend less money per student than worse schools in "poor" areas. You said that rich communities have more funding than poor communities. I think that rich communities actually spend less per student than poor communities. I think that it is parental involvement and the school environments that make the biggest difference.For instance, most suburbans good school districts don't have the mega complexes/bureaucracy that you see in the cities. I saw a show on the LA School District and their HQ was a bigger complex than most companies outside of the Fortune 100. They could probably lower their per student cost and have better schools if all the money that goes into their HQ/staff actually made it to the schools.

We may be saying different things, but I think if so, you badly worded your original statement.

 

[stbugs]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

i admit i was exagerating a bit but kids in rich communities in schools that get a lot more funding do better in school than kids that work just as hard in low income areas in schools with less funding

Any link on this? Pretty sure my mom teaches in a very, very low income area and they get way more funding per student that the suburbs. If you have any link, I might believe you, but I think that the parental involvement/school environments in the "rich" areas tend to be a lot more conducive to learning and those cost exactly $0.I am pretty sure that everything I remember reading showed that inner cities tended to have higher per pupil costs than suburbs. I am very willing to say that I am wrong, but I don't believe that what you said is correct.

By the way, kudos to Edwards. As someone mentioned above, there are other athletes making way more than Edwards that don't donate that much money. My mom has reached into her own pocket probably more than the average NFL/NBA/MLB player to help the "poor" students that think of them as role models, and she does it on a teacher's salary.

Wow! Ever heard of ..."time is money"? I wonder if a well to do parent has more free time on their hands to offer "zero-cost parental involvement" due to not having to work a second or part-time job to make ends meet?These blanket statements about kids and opportunities are just killing me!

Did I ever say anything that contradicted that? Get off your high horse.

I said that $$$ per student was not the reason why rich areas have better schools than poor areas. I am pretty sure that Los Angeles or Atlanta or any other city puts more $$$ into their schools than my county which has great schools.

Obviously, you agree with me that there is more parental involvement, so I am correct.

My mom has taught in the worst area in her state for many, many years and she could have easily gone to a much easier area to teach. Believe me, I know a whole lot about how a good teacher can actually make an affect on really poor kids. My mom and dad have put a whole lot of their time and money into her kids.

 

[wdh76]

i admit i was exagerating a bit but kids in rich communities in schools that get a lot more funding do better in school than kids that work just as hard in low income areas in schools with less funding

Any link on this? Pretty sure my mom teaches in a very, very low income area and they get way more funding per student that the suburbs. If you have any link, I might believe you, but I think that the parental involvement/school environments in the "rich" areas tend to be a lot more conducive to learning and those cost exactly $0.I am pretty sure that everything I remember reading showed that inner cities tended to have higher per pupil costs than suburbs. I am very willing to say that I am wrong, but I don't believe that what you said is correct.

i've found a couple links that support exactly what i'm talking about but they're fairly old websites. i'll see if i can find a more up to date one. do you have a link that shows how schools in low income areas with less funding produce better students (better grades)? that sounds like more of an outrageous claim than my own ... are we talking about the same thing here?

Title I...Look it up. I work in the testing department here in Norfolk, VA and I know for a FACT that title I schools get way more funding than non-title I schools. When you compare performances non title 1 schools are far and away the better schools. Yes, more money does not produce better results. More parental/community involvment does however.

 

[PsychoMan]

Nope, not saying less funding produces better grades. I am saying that better schools in "rich" areas spend less money per student than worse schools in "poor" areas. You said that rich communities have more funding than poor communities. I think that rich communities actually spend less per student than poor communities. I think that it is parental involvement and the school environments that make the biggest difference.For instance, most suburbans good school districts don't have the mega complexes/bureaucracy that you see in the cities. I saw a show on the LA School District and their HQ was a bigger complex than most companies outside of the Fortune 100. They could probably lower their per student cost and have better schools if all the money that goes into their HQ/staff actually made it to the schools.We may be saying different things, but I think if so, you badly worded your original statement.

i think i'm agreeing with you for the most part ... but i was not aware that low income areas get more funding in their schools. i was under the impression that higher income areas put a lot more money into their schools to provide better education & services etc ...

 

[wdh76]

Nope, not saying less funding produces better grades. I am saying that better schools in "rich" areas spend less money per student than worse schools in "poor" areas. You said that rich communities have more funding than poor communities. I think that rich communities actually spend less per student than poor communities. I think that it is parental involvement and the school environments that make the biggest difference.For instance, most suburbans good school districts don't have the mega complexes/bureaucracy that you see in the cities. I saw a show on the LA School District and their HQ was a bigger complex than most companies outside of the Fortune 100. They could probably lower their per student cost and have better schools if all the money that goes into their HQ/staff actually made it to the schools.We may be saying different things, but I think if so, you badly worded your original statement.

i think i'm agreeing with you for the most part ... but i was not aware that low income areas get more funding in their schools. i was under the impression that higher income areas put a lot more money into their schools to provide better education & services etc ...

Again I would suggest looking up Title I...Lower income schools get more funding...

 

[PsychoMan]

Again I would suggest looking up Title I...Lower income schools get more funding...

so, this provides some funding to some schools in low income areas that qualify? does this funding bump the schools up to the level of funding rich schools get, or beyond? is there data on this somewhere - i'm really curious.and then why are the school facilities in rich areas 100x nicer than facilities in low income area schools?

btw i completely agree with an above statement that said that parental involvement is a huge factor in the success of the students - again this is much more common in rich areas as, i think, pizzatyme pointed out

 

[Da Guru]

After always hearing and reading about Terrell Owens, Vick and Pacmans antics..what a joy to hear Braylon is doing something like this.

 

[wdh76]

Again I would suggest looking up Title I...Lower income schools get more funding...

so, this provides some funding to some schools in low income areas that qualify? does this funding bump the schools up to the level of funding rich schools get, or beyond? is there data on this somewhere - i'm really curious.and then why are the school facilities in rich areas 100x nicer than facilities in low income area schools?

btw i completely agree with an above statement that said that parental involvement is a huge factor in the success of the students - again this is much more common in rich areas as, i think, pizzatyme pointed out

I cannot speak for what happens outside of this city, but here is how it works around here. Norfolk has 35 elementary schools, of which 17 qualify for Title I. Each school receives X amount of funding per student from the local/state/federal government. The Title I schools get even more funding on top of the funding that all schools receive. So, we have 17 schools, all low income, receiving ALOT more funding than the other 18. Make sense?

 

[stbugs]

Again I would suggest looking up Title I...Lower income schools get more funding...

so, this provides some funding to some schools in low income areas that qualify? does this funding bump the schools up to the level of funding rich schools get, or beyond? is there data on this somewhere - i'm really curious.and then why are the school facilities in rich areas 100x nicer than facilities in low income area schools?

btw i completely agree with an above statement that said that parental involvement is a huge factor in the success of the students - again this is much more common in rich areas as, i think, pizzatyme pointed out

Schools in rich areas are nicer because I think more money goes into those schools instead of paying salaries, AC, pensions, etc. that go into the huge overhead of the large city school districts. As I mentioned before the LA School District is housed in what I can only describe as a large company's biggest office. Not one penny that pays for that overhead goes to the kids.Also, I think that because there is less $$$ going towards trying to make the environment right and make the kids want to learn, the return on capital is greater in rich areas. I have no idea how to explain it, but I think you need less money to teach a kid who's mindset is that they expect to go to college, than to teach a kid who is surrounded by a mindset that they don't expect to go to college.

Personally, I don't think more $$$ is the answer, as I think there is probably more than enough. I think it is the return on investment that must be improved. Get the tax $$$ directly to the students. Big school districts probably spend enough on overhead to by every incoming kindergartner a new laptop, but because of that overhead, they probably have fewer classroom computers than the rich areas.

 

[-OZ-]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

He must have meant:"the smart, rich, white kids who have everything else given to them."

 

[PsychoMan]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

He must have meant:"the smart, rich, white kids who have everything else given to them."

ahh yes, i did forget that partthanks

 

[Byron_nyc]

Very classy. Nice to see it noted.

 

[PsychoMan]

Make sense?

yeah that does

Schools in rich areas are nicer because I think more money goes into those schools instead of paying salaries, AC, pensions, etc. that go into the huge overhead of the large city school districts. As I mentioned before the LA School District is housed in what I can only describe as a large company's biggest office. Not one penny that pays for that overhead goes to the kids.

Also, I think that because there is less $$$ going towards trying to make the environment right and make the kids want to learn, the return on capital is greater in rich areas. I have no idea how to explain it, but I think you need less money to teach a kid who's mindset is that they expect to go to college, than to teach a kid who is surrounded by a mindset that they don't expect to go to college.

Personally, I don't think more $$$ is the answer, as I think there is probably more than enough. I think it is the return on investment that must be improved. Get the tax $$$ directly to the students. Big school districts probably spend enough on overhead to by every incoming kindergartner a new laptop, but because of that overhead, they probably have fewer classroom computers than the rich areas.

hmm interesting - thanks for the infofunding may not have been the word i was looking for. but, if that's the case then replace it with whatever-it-is-that-gives-rich-kids-their-own-laptops-and-far-superior-facilities-than-kids-that-must-go-to-school-in-low-income-areas

eta - and regardless of who ends up getting the $, this is an incredibly cool move by braylon and gives me a big reason to be a huge fan of his. that is SO much money to give away - would be very cool to see other pro athletes follow in his footsteps.

 

[*****]

Way to go Braylon.

He is a hard worker, very talented, and a good person (even if he is a big-mouth, too). I am really rooting for him to overcome his recent injuries and become a real star. It would be great to see what he could do with a really big contract and greater noteriety. I'm tired of TO and Vick being the wrong kind of NFL stars. I'm ready to see a star who can be this positive--even if he's flashy, too (which Braylon can definitely be sometimes).

 

[wadegarrett]

 

[Phurfur]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

He must have meant:"the smart, rich, white kids who have everything else given to them."

ahh yes, i did forget that partthanks

My statement had nothing to do with race. It has to do the putting people in a group and pre-judging them.

 

[PsychoMan]

My statement had nothing to do with race. It has to do the putting people in a group and pre-judging them.

there is a large group of rich kids in a nearby area that each come from well off families, have their own laptops in school, and have amazing school facilities. there's another large group of kids in a nearby area (both within 15 minutes of my house) that have ####ty desks, no laptops and currently don't have a specified math curriculum. my wife has substitute taught in both districts, and currently is teaching in a lower income district. its a fact that the kids in the lower income area are not nearly as "smart" --according to their standardized tests and reports from teachers, and their parents are clearly far less involved in their education. these are the groups that your are calling me prejudice about.

 

[Phurfur]

My statement had nothing to do with race. It has to do the putting people in a group and pre-judging them.

there is a large group of rich kids in a nearby area that each come from well off families, have their own laptops in school, and have amazing school facilities. there's another large group of kids in a nearby area (both within 15 minutes of my house) that have ####ty desks, no laptops and currently don't have a specified math curriculum. my wife has substitute taught in both districts, and currently is teaching in a lower income district. its a fact that the kids in the lower income area are not nearly as "smart" --according to their standardized tests and reports from teachers, and their parents are clearly far less involved in their education. these are the groups that your are calling me prejudice about.

This statement alone show a massive prejudice.

 

[Bobcat10]

I heard about this recently. Props to Braylon. Besides these two large sums of money, he is also active in the community doing other things. Sometimes it seems like he gets a bad rap, but he seems like a real good guy.

 

[PsychoMan]

My statement had nothing to do with race. It has to do the putting people in a group and pre-judging them.

there is a large group of rich kids in a nearby area that each come from well off families, have their own laptops in school, and have amazing school facilities. there's another large group of kids in a nearby area (both within 15 minutes of my house) that have ####ty desks, no laptops and currently don't have a specified math curriculum. my wife has substitute taught in both districts, and currently is teaching in a lower income district. its a fact that the kids in the lower income area are not nearly as "smart" --according to their standardized tests and reports from teachers, and their parents are clearly far less involved in their education. these are the groups that your are calling me prejudice about.

This statement alone show a massive prejudice.

Are you saying that I'm lying to you about these groups? Or am I wrong (if so, you should come over sometime and I'll show you the schools)? Or am I correct, but shouldn't be allowed to state the truth because it sounds prejudice?

 

[QUEZILLA]

$15,000 would have been suficient.

-K9-Mexico

 

[QUEZILLA]

Also, Braylon Edwards donated the same amout here as the entire NFL initially did to Katrina.

 

[stbugs]

Make sense?

yeah that does

Schools in rich areas are nicer because I think more money goes into those schools instead of paying salaries, AC, pensions, etc. that go into the huge overhead of the large city school districts. As I mentioned before the LA School District is housed in what I can only describe as a large company's biggest office. Not one penny that pays for that overhead goes to the kids.

Also, I think that because there is less $$$ going towards trying to make the environment right and make the kids want to learn, the return on capital is greater in rich areas. I have no idea how to explain it, but I think you need less money to teach a kid who's mindset is that they expect to go to college, than to teach a kid who is surrounded by a mindset that they don't expect to go to college.

Personally, I don't think more $$$ is the answer, as I think there is probably more than enough. I think it is the return on investment that must be improved. Get the tax $$$ directly to the students. Big school districts probably spend enough on overhead to by every incoming kindergartner a new laptop, but because of that overhead, they probably have fewer classroom computers than the rich areas.

hmm interesting - thanks for the infofunding may not have been the word i was looking for. but, if that's the case then replace it with whatever-it-is-that-gives-rich-kids-their-own-laptops-and-far-superior-facilities-than-kids-that-must-go-to-school-in-low-income-areas

eta - and regardless of who ends up getting the $, this is an incredibly cool move by braylon and gives me a big reason to be a huge fan of his. that is SO much money to give away - would be very cool to see other pro athletes follow in his footsteps.

Absolutely cool move on his part and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> above normal for pro athletes.Wouldn't it be a nice world if MTV did a show called Charities instead of Cribs and they showed how cool it was to give back to the community? There are tons of athletes signing 30-100 million dollar deals and the leagues make hundreds of millions+ and it is rare that you see as generous a donation as Edwards made.

 

[-OZ-]

Wouldn't it be a nice world if MTV did a show called Charities instead of Cribs and they showed how cool it was to give back to the community?

ESPN does this on occasion.

 

[-OZ-]

Cool....but at least make the kids work...a 2.5 GPA

FYI for some kids that IS a lot of work and something to be very proud of. Not everyone can be a rocket scientist like you.

he probably wants the scholarship available to them as well as the smart, rich kids who have everything else given to them.

This is one of the most prejudicial statements I've read in quite awhile.

He must have meant:"the smart, rich, white kids who have everything else given to them."

ahh yes, i did forget that partthanks

My statement had nothing to do with race. It has to do the putting people in a group and pre-judging them.

If your comment is that rich doesn't equal smart, ok. But, the kids with better grades already get a lot of scholarships. As do those with athletic backgrounds.

Nothing wrong at all with helping kids who fall short of the typical scholarships. If anything, this is the segment that is most needed. If Braylon helps a few students go to college who otherwise wouldn't (those with lower grades are less likely to attend college), he's done a phenomenal job. From my experience, many inner city youths have lower grades, for reasons varying from having to work after school, to poor nutrition, to education not being a priority. He seems to be targetting these kids.

The rich kids who don't get good grades are also more likely to attend higher education.

Maybe he should have said "the smart kids and the rich kids who are at an advantage in life", would that make you happy?

 

[Da Guru]

$15,000 would have been suficient.-K9-Mexico

15?? 10K is more than enough!

 

[Reservoir Dog]

Very refreshing to hear a story like this, instead of another Pac Man or Chris Henry story. Braylon!

 

[Phurfur]

My statement had nothing to do with race. It has to do the putting people in a group and pre-judging them.

there is a large group of rich kids in a nearby area that each come from well off families, have their own laptops in school, and have amazing school facilities. there's another large group of kids in a nearby area (both within 15 minutes of my house) that have ####ty desks, no laptops and currently don't have a specified math curriculum. my wife has substitute taught in both districts, and currently is teaching in a lower income district. its a fact that the kids in the lower income area are not nearly as "smart" --according to their standardized tests and reports from teachers, and their parents are clearly far less involved in their education. these are the groups that your are calling me prejudice about.

This statement alone show a massive prejudice.

Are you saying that I'm lying to you about these groups? Or am I wrong (if so, you should come over sometime and I'll show you the schools)? Or am I correct, but shouldn't be allowed to state the truth because it sounds prejudice?

You are stating that every kid in the lower income areas are not nearly as "smart" (according to tests and teachers) as every kid in the "rich" areas. This is a very dangerous statement and completely false.

 

[stbugs]

Wouldn't it be a nice world if MTV did a show called Charities instead of Cribs and they showed how cool it was to give back to the community?

ESPN does this on occasion.

Must be on ESPN Ocho, although I have to admit I don't watch ESPN as much as I used to.

 

[PsychoMan]

My statement had nothing to do with race. It has to do the putting people in a group and pre-judging them.

there is a large group of rich kids in a nearby area that each come from well off families, have their own laptops in school, and have amazing school facilities. there's another large group of kids in a nearby area (both within 15 minutes of my house) that have ####ty desks, no laptops and currently don't have a specified math curriculum. my wife has substitute taught in both districts, and currently is teaching in a lower income district. its a fact that the kids in the lower income area are not nearly as "smart" --according to their standardized tests and reports from teachers, and their parents are clearly far less involved in their education. these are the groups that your are calling me prejudice about.

This statement alone show a massive prejudice.

Are you saying that I'm lying to you about these groups? Or am I wrong (if so, you should come over sometime and I'll show you the schools)? Or am I correct, but shouldn't be allowed to state the truth because it sounds prejudice?

You are stating that every kid in the lower income areas are not nearly as "smart" (according to tests and teachers) as every kid in the "rich" areas. This is a very dangerous statement and completely false.

sorry dude your really stretching here. not sure what you're trying to accomplish.

i did not state that every single kid in the rich area is smarter than every single kid in the poor area. i said the kids in the lower income area (that means in general) are not nearly as "smart" (smart being determined by standardized tests) as the kids in the rich area. i'm not saying that there can't be kids in the poor area that are smarter than a number of the kids in the rich area. nor am i saying that the kids in the poor area are dumb ... in fact, i've stated before that the kids in the poor area have far less opportunity to excel in school, and i would never blame the children for this.

eta - if this makes no sense to you, then we can agree to disagree i suppose - enough with the hijacking.