Camden Pays Kids $100 Each to Not Skip School

[heyelander]

Thoughts?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44256731/ns/local_news-philadelphia_pa/#.TlUa8l1vCNo

The city of Camden will be paying almost 70 high school students $100 each to go to school in the first three weeks of the year.

Funded by a grant that must be used by Sept. 30, the city is trying to fight truancy with a new program called I Can End Truancy (ICE-T), reports the Inquirer.

To receive the promised $100, each of the 66 targeted students must attend classes as well as conflict-resolution and anger-management workshops until Sept. 30.

...

The required state minimum attendance rate is 90 percent. Camden made the minimum requirement last year, but it has been below 90 percent in past years, according to Ramona Pearson-Hunter, the district's director of alternative programs.

Seems like a bad precedence, but maybe not a bad idea? At first I thought it sounded too much like the scenes from the Wire where they go around and pick up truants for one day so they get listed on the school's enrollment for funding purposes, but the part about required anger management and conflict resolution classes may pay for the program 10x over in the long run.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Thoughts?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44256731/ns/local_news-philadelphia_pa/#.TlUa8l1vCNo

Seems like a bad precedence, but maybe not a bad idea? At first I thought it sounded too much like the scenes from the Wire where they go around and pick up truants for one day so they get listed on the school's enrollment for funding purposes, but the part about required anger management and conflict resolution classes may pay for the program 10x over in the long run.

Seems like a very bad precedent. If parents were doing their jobs, the kids would be doing better in school. Instead of paying kids to go to school, how about ticketing/fining parents who don't make their kids attend class? I'm all for punitive measures for ****ty parents. As for paying kids who attend class, toss in good grades, community involvement and call it a scholarship.........

[Gregg]

I give credit for trying. I hope we will get to see how it works or doesn't.

[heyelander]

Seems like a very bad precedent. If parents were doing their jobs, the kids would be doing better in school. Instead of paying kids to go to school, how about ticketing/fining parents who don't make their kids attend class? I'm all for punitive measures for ****ty parents. As for paying kids who attend class, toss in good grades, community involvement and call it a scholarship.........

I hate to stereotype here, but since they are targeting a set number of specific kids here, my guess is you would have a hard time finding the parents to ticket them and getting the fines paid would be easier than getting blood from a stone.

[GwynnInTheHall]

I hate to stereotype here, but since they are targeting a set number of specific kids here, my guess is you would have a hard time finding the parents to ticket them and getting the fines paid would be easier than getting blood from a stone.

I understand, it's one of my many-pet peeves--Bad Parents--

[B-Fly]

Agree that bad parenting is one of the biggest problems in education, but given the limited options available to government and/or school districts to 'fix' bad parenting, the question becomes what government and/or school districts (or charitable foundations that often fund these kinds of initiatives) can and should do to attempt to 'save' the kids despite their negligent-or-worse parents. Because ultimately it is really bad for society in the short, medium and long-term just to give up on those kids.

[johnnya24]

Are there not legal sanctions in the US against parents who do not prevent their children from truanting?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-114441/Bid-free-mother-jailed-childrens-truancy.html

That is a story from last week ... though terrible journalism from the Daily Mail as usual:

It is believed to be the first time that the courts have jailed a parent under powers they gained in November 2000, when the maximum penalty for allowing a child to truant was raised from £1,000 to £2,500 and/or three months in prison.

From the Guardian in 2009:

Separate figures from the Ministry of Justice today reveal that 133 parents were jailed between 2000 and 2007 for failing to prevent their child's truancy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/feb/12/truancy-parents-jail

I haven't seen any figures lately to show if these sanctions had actually done anything to reduce truancy rates.

[chancellor]

Seems like a very bad precedent. If parents were doing their jobs, the kids would be doing better in school. Instead of paying kids to go to school, how about ticketing/fining parents who don't make their kids attend class? I'm all for punitive measures for ****ty parents. As for paying kids who attend class, toss in good grades, community involvement and call it a scholarship.........

Throw the parents out of the SUV!!

Seriously, this is gonna sound bizarre since I'll come off more liberal than you on this, but given that it's Camden, I suspect a lot of these kids have non-functional parents, due to crime, alcohol, drugs or any combination of the three. Give it a try and see if it works. We pee away a whole lot more money on programs that make a lot less sense than this.

[GwynnInTheHall]

I understand and agree with the premise and I sincerely hope it can save some kids.

I swear this will come off as super conservative LOL BUT, I'd love to see parents held more accountable from birth till a child is 18. A more proactive approach to assure these kids have a brighter future ahead of them. If you stop the cycle of abuse and neglect, not only will society be better down the line-- it'll save money as well (that should give some of you a woody)

bad parents suck, especially the bad parents in SUVs.