So here's the question, and I think it addresses both your's and Jeff's point.....
How come poor, urban districts such as Newark, Asbury and Jersey City, who receive an enormous amount of federal funds do not achieve certain minimal, basic standards when "pretty, white" middle to upper middle class districts achieve proficient or advanced proficient standards with about half as much money per student??...
Maybe it is a combination of affluence and parenting -- money and environment.... My little one is only 6 years old and I am compulsive about providing what I consider the "best" situation to meet his needs. If we were economically stuck in some district like Newark or Asbury, I'd be devastated and I know, despite their wealth of funding and special services resources, his education would suffer. And what I now consider his "quirkiness" might become a life long "challenge"....
Yet I do believe most parents, at least initially, want the best for their children but the demands of raising children in an educational system with inherent problems can become overwhelming. The economic reality is that, in many instances, 2 parents have to work to survive and do not have the benefit of extended families or other "support systems". So what is the solution if every child is entitled to a "free" and "appropriate" public education?... I think this question is rhetorical??..