Palin: "Absurd" Not To Consider 2012 Run
Bloomberg: Crime Stat Manipulations are "Tiny"
Wall Street Throwing More Money at Republicans
School Already Canceled Tomorrow for Snowpocalypse!
More Bald Eagles Spotted In Harlem!
The city's deputy mayor of health and human services Linda Gibbs announced some details of how the cash-incentives-to-the-poor program will work yesterday. Students (whose schools participate in the program and whose families meet the critieria) would get $25/month for at least 95% elementary school attendance and 50%/month at the high school level, $600 for each of the five Regents exams passed, $300 for taking 11 high school credits a year, $50 for getting a library card and $50 for taking the PSAT. Additionally, some families will qualify for $150/month for working 30 hours a week and $600 for every 140 hours of job training.
The Times also notes that the DOE hired Harvard professor Roland Fryer as its "chief equality officer." Fryer has studied racial inequality in public schools and the Daily News excerpted some emails that Fryer (then a consultant to the city) sent principals a few weeks ago explaining incentives to school children: "Every kid gets an incentive just for taking each assessment; $5 for fourth graders and $10 for seventh graders...For each correct answer, students earn an additional reward. All students will earn something, but those that perform better will earn more."
The NY Sun spoke to conservative and "left-leaning" think tanks analysts who questioned the program. And though Darwin Davis, the president of the Urban League, told the Times, "I’m willing to say let’s see what works. We are in a capitalist society and people are motivated by money across race and across class, so why not?”, he wondered aloud "how many tests students would need to pass to buy the latest video game."
The city announced the "conditional cash transfer" program, Opportunity NYC, in March, which is similar to ones in Mexico and Brazil; its goal is to help break the cycle of poverty, and will tap into $53 million of private funds (partially donated by the Rockefeller, Starr, and other foundations and companies as well as Mayor Bloomberg himself). Back then, our readers' reactions were mixed. What do you think of the program now?
Graphic from the city's Center of Economic Opportunity
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
This is a joke. It has to be.
stupid idea - poor people don't know how to spend money, that's why they're poor
What the hell? Nobody paid ME to go to school. Why should people get cash incentives for doing what you're supposed to do? "Hey, you didn't shoot anyone this year, here's fifty bucks!"
what are you complaining about? you're not paying for it?
edit - "50%/month" ($50/month?)
This does seem pretty freakin' crazy. I don't mind the school attendance & regents angle (you could think of it as a scholarship that is doled out piecemeal), but to pay people for having a job[!?] or going to the doctor seems bizarre.
This program is just increasing the feelings of entitlement that many have. It is also teaching our children a very dangerous lesson. No one should be paid for going to school and getting a library card.
What the mayor should do is distribute vouchers for child care and transportation instead of money. That would ease the financial burden on poor families.
The play to pay the younger kids to perform on standardized tests also seems poorly thought out.
"Hey I'm smart! I got $50 for my math test! I'm gonna buy me a new PSP game."
"Yeah, well I'm mediocre, and I still got $20. I'm gonna buy a CD."
Kids today will be the ultimate 'Entitled Generation.' It's pretty awful that we have to pay kids to go to school and sign up for a library card. It is a parent's job to make sure their kid goes to school, has clothes on their back, food in their mouth, and a roof over their head. I wish I got an allowance from the government when I was in elementary school...
Add another incentive,
Parents NEED to be involved in their children's education. $20 for each Parents/Teachers meeting.
More if you don't threaten the teacher when hearing the truth that your child is disruptive in class.
child care is easy, No vouchers, no nothing, Free care, no questions asked.
Transportation is easy, different metrocards that are preset for students, after school programs, etc. It's the users responsibility to know which one to use, they are not unlimited but per trip.
Often, especially for families below the poverty line, older children have to quit school because they have to go out and get jobs. And if there was a financial incentive to keep after the kids and make sure their attendance is high, then they score better on performance tests, the schools get more money from the state, kids graduate and go on to college (if they can afford it - I'd like to see more incentives on that level, too). The real way out of poverty long-term is education, and anything that promotes education in terms of immediate benefits in the short-term has to be good.
um guys, the problem here is that non-conditional cash transfers don't seem to be working out too well, and that when people are broke their short term and long term interests do not align well -- especially when one is poor. the hope is that, although incredibly paternalistic, this will teach (and reward in the short term) good behavior that will help people out further on down the road. hopefully keeping them off of public assistance. its actually a pretty interesting approach and it has worked well in other cities. its kind of shocking that this is even mildly controversial, especially since its mostly being funded privately.
its cheaper in the long run to pay people to go to the doctor regularly, and hoepfully prevent poor health conditions, than paying for expensive treatment later..
It's a great idea because it requires the poor people actually do the things that will get them out of poverty and save the government a ton of money in the long run. For every pre-diagnosed problem and every dentist visit we the tax payers save thousands of dollars.
Most poor people want to get out of poverty and this helps them do it and promotes healthy and good behavior.
Go Bloomy.
I'm willing to see how the program works out. A little incentive is always good, as everyone loves a bonus for a job well done. I hope, however, that oversight is applied to prevent frauding the system. Also, as brklnd pointed out, I hope the kids are encouraged to use the money wisely; maybe one CD for fun, but is there an effort also to encourage kids to save the money? Though saving money in poor households is tough to do. Every penny is used just to live.
Education will get families out of poverty and the ghetto. this has been done before even in suburban schools, incentives for reading books.
Stop the emphasis on sports and music. Bring back Home Economics classes and sewing. Yep, I had to endure both of those in Jr. High. Home Ec was cool because you got to eat what you made.
What's the incentive for getting tubes tied or vasectomies?
What did people from New Orleans spend their free money on again? I can't remember.
Getting paid to do something is pretty good incentve.
I wouldn't do as well at my job if I knew I wouldn't get rewarded for it.
There is sound theory behind this.
Look at merit pay for teachers. Such an alien concept to the UFT but normal for ppl in the private sector.
how does this encourage people to learn? it encourages them to show up and do good on tests-- which opens to door for new and inventive ways to cheat the system.
Disclaimer: I once taught in the NYC public schools. Extreme cynicism ahead.
Instead of external motivators (C-A-S-H $ M-O-N-E-Y), the DOE should be developing ways to help students cultivate the internal desire to learn and do well. Instead, the DOE is setting the worst possible example for students, by taking the easy way out: pay the kids off, then sit back because you are the good guy who gave money to "poor people" but made them earn it first! The fact is that it's easy for the DOE to just throw other people's money at students, and the DOE has little incentive to do much else.
After all, once the kids have dropped out, aged out, or otherwise checked out of the system, they're not the DOE's problem anymore. The problem is that, as city residents, we're the ones who will someday be these students' managers, coworkers, and customers. We'll be the ones left to deal with the collateral consequences of the DOE's sly dodges.
buy stock in tobacco, sneaker & grape soda companies.
kfs: do you know every single one of the people in New Orleans and how they spent their money? Every one of them?
Narixx: excellent points; what ways do you suggest in regards to cultivating internal desire to learn and do well? Is there a component to this program that helps do cultivate that internal desire in combination with the external motivation?
No ideas here, re: developing internal motivation. (wouldn't it be great if I had some? then I'd waste a lot less time at work on Gothamist...) I taught, but I'm not a child psychologist or any other qualified professional. I did notice, however, that many of my former students lacked the self-esteem to believe that they were worth expending any effort. Those efforts were better spent on worthy causes such as professional athletes and musicians, video game characters, etc. The things that "matter".
This program may wind up cultivate internal motivation, but I think it would be an indirect (and possibly even random) effect. The direct effect reinforces a questionable lesson: success means money, money means "things", and "things" make for a great distraction from the parts of your life that you don't like thinking about.
i agree with [16], cut off the problem before it begins. Its ridiculous that you are compensated to even have children if you have no way of supporting them. If you are on public assistance, you should have to be on some type of temporary but foolproof chemical birth control or you lose all privileges.
Thanks, narixx, you and me both re: Gothamist. Self-esteem can easily get beaten down below the poverty line (and any other line for that matter). I wish I knew some sort of formula for success, but really... I myself feel beaten down by political, economic and social systems... I can only imagine how others who are less fortunate than me feel. It's difficult to motivate if you don't see any reason to do so in the first place.
We already are working on ways to "cut Off" the problem. Why do you think soda in the 'hood is so cheap? tell me where can you get a 20oz bottle of soda for .49? in a dozen flavors, no less.
that and the first taste is free, after that it's gonna cost ya.
narixx, i don't think this is a DOE program, but a health & human services one, and its not just students that are applicable for the transfers, but anyway -- if the problem is only internal, why have these programs worked well in other cities? also i'd like to make the argument that earning money, even if it is only a trivial amount, may actually teach self esteem & empowerment in the long run. "hey, i earned this. i made this happen."
Way to fuck over the middle class again, because you just KNOW that if any remotely positive results come out of this frankenstinian experiment they're going to want to make this bullshit permanent.
What kids need is tough love.
I've been a big fan of Roland Fryer's since I saw him speak in Harlem a couple of years ago. He rightly points out that, when it comes to education, nobody knows what the solutions are, and so we need to be trying new ones all the time, and gathering data from them.
Because we all had some kind of schooling, education is the one policy area that everybody thinks they are an expert on. But some of the above statements (e.g., "What kids need is tough love," and "Nobody paid ME to go to school. Why should people get cash incentives for doing what you're supposed to do?") show that we believe education should not change from how it was when we were kids. There are few other issue areas where we are so stuck in our ways.
Dr. Fryer is right when he says there is a dearth of data for education. We need to try these programs, see if they work, scrap them if they don't, and build on them if they do.
There is an understandable sentiment that using cash incentives to teach kids to do well in school is dangerous and immoral. That was my first reaction as well. But as Dr. Fryer points out, do you think people who work hard to go to Harvard Business school aren't driven by the money? The kids who this program are aimed at often don't have any family members who graduated high school. So we can't just tell them to work their whole lives for a vague reward that will come 15 years down the road, if they've never seen the light at the end of the tunnel. We need to give them small incentives along the way, to keep them on that path.
It is a dangerous program, yes. But it is one we need to try.
By the time I was in high school I would say 30% of my motivation came from a love of learning and 70% came from my observation that those with more education made more money and had more comfortable lives. I'm sure most of my middle class peers had the same thought (hmmm... Bobby's dad is a lawyer and has a really nice car... I work at Burger King for $5.49 an hour....) I don't have any problem paying kids for attendance or test results because I think it is just making the connection between education and money/comfort more clear to kids who may not otherwise see it (hmmmm.... I can get pregnant... or I can work at Burger King for $5.49 an hour....).
By the time I was in high school I would say 30% of my motivation came from a love of learning and 70% came from my observation that those with more education made more money and had more comfortable lives. I'm sure most of my middle class peers had the same thought (hmmm... Bobby's dad is a lawyer and has a really nice car... I work at Burger King for $5.49 an hour....) I don't have any problem paying kids for attendance or test results because I think it is just making the connection between education and money/comfort more clear to kids who may not otherwise see it (hmmmm.... I can get pregnant... or I can work at Burger King for $5.49 an hour....).
By the time I was in high school I would say 30% of my motivation came from a love of learning and 70% came from my observation that those with more education made more money and had more comfortable lives. I'm sure most of my middle class peers had the same thought (hmmm... Bobby's dad is a lawyer and has a really nice car... I work at Burger King for $5.49 an hour....) I don't have any problem paying kids for attendance or test results because I think it is just making the connection between education and money/comfort more clear to kids who may not otherwise see it (hmmmm.... I can get pregnant... or I can work at Burger King for $5.49 an hour....).