The number of school students eligible for lunch correlates positively with the amount of funding to the schools by the federal state. Such a correlation emerges due to the government’s commitment to fund low-income students for lunch to the rates of between 20 to 90 percent. However, the rating often becomes controversial as certain middle level families also deserve this subsidy but lack the means of maintaining their lunch program. For instance, many students from black and Hispanic backgrounds get a subsidy from the government to cater for their lunch program, which enhances their education.
The subsidies received in many state schools do not have any correlation with the age of the students. Often, the subsidy influences a majority of black and Hispanic background students but not their age. Therefore, there is negative correlation between the impact of the subsidy and the students’ age. For instance, the age factors does not affect the subsidy delivery as long as you are a student in the level required and you come from a low-income family. Examples are middle high school students who are of different age brackets. The students will often get the subsidy regardless of their ages. Additionally, age is inherent, as it is not spoken in the subsidy delivery.
The number of classroom connection to the internet had a minimal relationship to the student scores as displayed by the standardized tests. A minimal relationship shows a near negative relationship. Such correlations exist but are limited or hardly relevant to the requirements of the system. Apparently, the internet connection has no quantifiable effect on the achievement of the students. The report suggests that later, the results may have an influence on the academic performance of the students.
Evidence point to only a third of the teachers who are ready to use computers, as well as the internet available in the classrooms. The teachers have limited comfort working with the internet during their classroom sessions. Some of the teachers have limited knowledge in the information technology itemization. Other teachers feel that the internet has no direct significance to the teaching, especially after getting all; the information in the required textbooks or class notes. Such confessions tell why the students have limited benefit using the internet themselves if their teachers cannot find comfort in the connection. When teachers see no need in the internet usage, the students cannot be expected to use the internet. However, many students always have their internet system through Smartphone and do not have to rely on the internet. For instance, a research by university students if CU found that many students prefer to have a data plan which they could use and manage from anywhere in the campus as well as outside. Therefore, the internet connection has no direct connection to the student performance for the time being. Nevertheless, scholars believe that soon, the connectivity shall have an impact in the student results.
Goolsbee A., (2010). “Closing the digital divide,” Internet subsidies in public schools, Sept 29, Retrieved from http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/summer03/digitaldivide.html
Rhode D., (2006). “Where Is the Leadership in Moral Leadership?” D. 3 L. Rhode, ed., Moral Leadership: The Theory and Practice of Power, Judgment, and Policy, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass: 13.