115 Girls in One High School Are Pregnant

Pages

Just what it says in the title.

I am surprised at this, not just for the usual reasons, and to have the usual discussion about how bad sex education is doing and whatever, but Robeson High is in inner-city Chicago. I would generally associate such a high rate of pregnancy with spoilt middle class kids being fools or areas where birth control could be hard to get hold of. In the middle of Chicago, there is no excuse...

I wonder if that school practices abstinence education.

The article fails to mention the high school is just down the street from wordsmythes place. Coincidence??

This is what happens when you let the gym teacher give individualized sex education classes in his office behind closed doors.

Bullion Cube wrote:

The article fails to mention the high school is just down the street from wordsmythes place. Coincidence??

And mex did visit wordsmythe......

...and when did *Legion* last visit Chicago?

The fact is that the religious zealouts have just about destroyed generations' ability at sexual normalcy. Whether it is abstinence or some BS load about sexual sin. If you really care, pay attention to school board elections, write the governor and your state representatives, go to the PTA meetings parents.

Apparently, the school is one of the worst in Chicago, and 96.5% of the students are "economically disadvanted". It's probably an extreme example of the effects of poverty on a neighborhood school.

Ulairi wrote:
Bullion Cube wrote:

The article fails to mention the high school is just down the street from wordsmythes place. Coincidence??

And mex did visit wordsmythe......

Alien Love Gardener wrote:

...and when did *Legion* last visit Chicago?

We've solved the issue, everyone can go home. Nothing to see here.

VDOWhoNeedsDD wrote:

In the middle of Chicago, there is no excuse...

It sounds like you already have your mind made up.

Robear wrote:

Apparently, the school is one of the worst in Chicago, and 96.5% of the students are "economically disadvanted". It's probably an extreme example of the effects of poverty on a neighborhood school.

Bingo.

There is also the reality that the worst schools in the country are vastly underfunded and when it's time to pick and choose what curriculum stays and what goes when determining how best to spend the money, well math and English are going to stay. Sex education is going to go.

FSeven wrote:

There is also the reality that the worst schools in the country are vastly underfunded ...

Using greatschools.net, spending per pupil at Robeson H.S. is $9,282. Spending per pupil at my local suburban, "Excellent rated" Ohio high school is $9,676.

While poverty is likely the largest contributing factor, school funding tends to be blown out of proportion.

LilCodger wrote:
FSeven wrote:

There is also the reality that the worst schools in the country are vastly underfunded ...

Using greatschools.net, spending per pupil at Robeson H.S. is $9,282. Spending per pupil at my local suburban, "Excellent rated" Ohio high school is $9,676.

While poverty is likely the largest contributing factor, school funding tends to be blown out of proportion.

I think that is a bit of an unfair comparison though. How much, for instance, does commercial real estate go for per square foot in your area?

KingGorilla wrote:

The fact is that the religious zealouts have just about destroyed generations' ability at sexual normalcy. Whether it is abstinence or some BS load about sexual sin. If you really care, pay attention to school board elections, write the governor and your state representatives, go to the PTA meetings parents.

There was absolutely no talk of abstinence education in this article...but somehow it because the secret culprit? Please. Lets not use a sad situation like this to pile blame on a personal vendetta. The one reason the article did mention was not enough talk about sex at home.

If you really care, talk to your kids about sex before they try and figure things out themselves, and encourage other parents to take responsibility and do the same.

Whether you believe premarital sex is sin or not, there is no question that it has consequences, whether that be a emotional anguish, or a teen mom.

Paleocon wrote:
LilCodger wrote:
FSeven wrote:

There is also the reality that the worst schools in the country are vastly underfunded ...

Using greatschools.net, spending per pupil at Robeson H.S. is $9,282. Spending per pupil at my local suburban, "Excellent rated" Ohio high school is $9,676.

While poverty is likely the largest contributing factor, school funding tends to be blown out of proportion.

I think that is a bit of an unfair comparison though. How much, for instance, does commercial real estate go for per square foot in your area?

Just wondering, how is that relevant to LC's point on spending per pupil?

Paleo - Is your point that while spending per pupil is largely the same, costs are much greater in inner-city Chicago?

Sallary's are probably greater, but books, furniture and most other expenses should be relatively on par. Schools wouldn't pay property taxes and I'd like to think the buildings aren't leased.

Paleocon wrote:
LilCodger wrote:
FSeven wrote:

There is also the reality that the worst schools in the country are vastly underfunded ...

Using greatschools.net, spending per pupil at Robeson H.S. is $9,282. Spending per pupil at my local suburban, "Excellent rated" Ohio high school is $9,676.

While poverty is likely the largest contributing factor, school funding tends to be blown out of proportion.

I think that is a bit of an unfair comparison though. How much, for instance, does commercial real estate go for per square foot in your area?

Relatively low because tons of it is sitting empty. I've seen decent locations as low as $5 per sq. ft. Even some good locations are going between $10-20.

I'm failing to see how that affects spending per pupil, except for the fact that my neighborhood is more likely to have more money some day comparatively. A large part of our current funding crisis comes from a repeal of personal property taxation of business.

I have a personal vendetta against lies and misinformation, yes. Doubly againsted wasted tax dollars on "programs" that do not work. Even more so if they come from some sweaty faced preacher.

America has a big problem with infant mortality, STDs, unwanted pregnancy. Abstinance is the standard, and it has failed our kids.

When it comes to sex and science, the only thing that seems to be standing between America's kids and a decent secondary education is the pulpit and the crucifix.

Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

I think that is a bit of an unfair comparison though. How much, for instance, does commercial real estate go for per square foot in your area?

Just wondering, how is that relevant to LC's point on spending per pupil?

The higher cost of living in Chicago means, eg, that you can hire fewer teachers for the same amount of money. Not sure how commercial real estate factors in though, since the school is owned by the state.

KingGorilla wrote:

I have a personal vendetta against lies and misinformation, yes. Doubly againsted wasted tax dollars on "programs" that do not work. Even more so if they come from some sweaty faced preacher.

America has a big problem with infant mortality, STDs, unwanted pregnancy. Abstinance is the standard, and it has failed our kids.

I have a personal vendetta against lies and misinformation as well, and I am also against wasted tax dollars on "programs" that do not work, yet we are still not in agreement. Interesting. I'm not certain I understand your beef with clergy that perspire more than normal, but I'm sure that's a long story.

I'd agree that we have a large problem with infant mortality, STDs, unwanted pregnancy, but since abstinence is hardly the standard in schools that I'm aware of, I'm pretty sure it isn't to blame.

KingGorilla wrote:

I have a personal vendetta against lies and misinformation, yes. Doubly againsted wasted tax dollars on "programs" that do not work. Even more so if they come from some sweaty faced preacher.

America has a big problem with infant mortality, STDs, unwanted pregnancy. Abstinance is the standard, and it has failed our kids.

Indeed. I think an unhealthy lack of comfort with information/material of a sexual nature is a factor. Poverty just exacerbates it. We'd much rather delude ourselves into believing that our kids aren't having sex than confront the real problem.

but since abstinence is hardly the standard in schools that I'm aware of, I'm pretty sure it isn't to blame.

It was pushed much harder during the Bush years, and every time abstinence-only is taught, teen pregnancy and STD rates go up substantially.

johnny531 wrote:
Nomad wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

I think that is a bit of an unfair comparison though. How much, for instance, does commercial real estate go for per square foot in your area?

Just wondering, how is that relevant to LC's point on spending per pupil?

The higher cost of living in Chicago means, eg, that you can hire fewer teachers for the same amount of money. Not sure how commercial real estate factors in though, since the school is owned by the state.

That's the direction I'm going toward. I imagine there are a great many things that cost a lot more in Chicago than in Ohio for equivalent items. In many cases, the buildings themselves are not owned by the state, but rather leased by the municipality. Even in cases were the property is owned, one has to assume that it was purchased at one point and the servicing of the bonds on higher property values would make a difference.

Student to teacher ratios are about the same, and Robeson seems to be above IL state average in most statistics. The school population is roughly 1200 them, 1000 my district.

Perhaps the telling statistic provided by that site is this:

Emergency or provisional credentials 9%

So they have trouble recruiting teachers. Given my friends who teach in Detroit and its suburbs, I'd guess student behavior is a major factor. That again could be indicative of poverty amongst the student body, but not directly related to school funding.

On a lighter note, I think it behooves us all to watch the Sex Ed South Park episode this weekend. In their trademark way they get to the root of the problem. And if you really want kids to stay abstinant, have Mr Garrison put a condom on orally.

And on the issue of suburban to inner city schools. The real issue is allocation of funds and parent/community involvememt. Speaking of Detroit and Chicago add corruption in as well. But parental involvement is the biggest way to get changes in education.

KingGorilla wrote:

And if you really want kids to stay abstinant, have Mr Garrison put a condom on orally.

I think that just ruined my sex life a bit, too.

LouZiffer wrote:

Indeed. I think an unhealthy lack of comfort with information/material of a sexual nature is a factor. Poverty just exacerbates it. We'd much rather delude ourselves into believing that our kids aren't having sex than confront the real problem.

Yep. My parents never had "the talk" with me because they were just way too uncomfortable and I imagine when my kids is old enough I'll let my wife, the nurse in training, handle that talk. A conservative (not political or religious, just in general) upbringing can leave a person feeling that certain things should just never be talked about. Odd really.

Also, I think I will fire up Dangerous Highschool Girls in Trouble tonight.

KingGorilla wrote:

Parental involvement is the biggest way to get changes in education.

This in spades. It's the PARENTS who have the most control in any school district. Unfortunately, this is also a double-edged sword. We've gone from parents lobbying the school district for smaller class sizes and more money to lobbying for teachers to teach such basics as mutual respect, manners, etiquette, personal responsibility, sex education and even moral right and wrongs. Certainly a part of the classroom/education experience is teaching social customs and norms, but what happened to the idea of parents raising their children? When did the educational system become responsible for literally raising children into well adjusted adults?

ThatGuy42 wrote:

When did the educational system become responsible for literally raising children into well adjusted adults?

When both parents started working 60 and 70 hour work weeks so that the children only see their parents for a couple hours on the weekend in between sporting events and and parties?

ThatGuy42 wrote:

When did the educational system become responsible for literally raising children into well adjusted adults?

At the point where both Parents had to work full-time jobs to maintain a 'comfortable' standard of living.
EDIT: What Kehama said.

Kehama wrote:
LouZiffer wrote:

Indeed. I think an unhealthy lack of comfort with information/material of a sexual nature is a factor. Poverty just exacerbates it. We'd much rather delude ourselves into believing that our kids aren't having sex than confront the real problem.

Yep. My parents never had "the talk" with me because they were just way too uncomfortable and I imagine when my kids is old enough I'll let my wife, the nurse in training, handle that talk. A conservative (not political or religious, just in general) upbringing can leave a person feeling that certain things should just never be talked about. Odd really.

I'm right there with you on the conservative values part.. I'll never have kids, but I have a VERY hard time discussing sexual matters with people in a non-dick-and-fart-joke manner. In person. Online I'm all over that topic

My parents believed that your body is a disgusting thing and almost never talked about sex. There were only two things I remember being brought up in regards to sex:

1. My dad taking his naked motorcycle mags away from me and my brother when we were 8ish telling us they are for when we get older and
2. My dad telling me to keep it in my pants. That is literally all he said, "Keep it in your pants." That was the full extent of sex education from my parents.

Pages