This proves once again that poverty has continuity and causality. It will cause one difficulty after another to keep happening. This is not only because poverty deprives people of options, but also because society unconsciously creates barriers against them.

I find that this phenomenon may be caused by two reasons. The first reason is that working class parents need more time to finish or think about their own work, so they do not have more energy to communicate with their children deeply. The second reason is that working class parents often play the role of listener in their work. They become less concerned with independent thinking and judgment.

By comparing the activities of children from middle class families with those from working class families and those from poor families, we can find that the differences are mainly reflected in two aspects: 1. Quantity 2. The cost to be spent. It seems to reflect a class divide that is likely to cement the future of these children.

In the same way, I think the difficulty with research on the influence of family factors on children is that there are some factors that are difficult to define whether they are given to children by the family or by society. Such as circle of friends, vision and so on.

I also believe that confidence is always the key to success. I recalled the message my primary school teacher had sent me. She wanted me to have confidence in my face, kindness in my heart, courage engraved in my bones, and strong in my blood.

We can see how the lack of communication between parents and teachers can have a negative effect on students. This negative effect can lead to a long-term lack of attention and encouragement, and reinforce the inferiority of the students. What's more, even if some parents communicate with teachers, they will only scold their children by beating them, because they have no time and patience. This can lead to more physical and mental frustration.

My father had experienced such poverty. It was the eighties in China and almost everyone was poor let alone in the countryside. According to his description, he not only got up at 4 am every day to walk ten kilometers of mountain road to school but also did farm work at night. His daily diet consists mostly of potatoes, corn and pickles. There was no electricity, only kerosene lamps for light.

I also feel sorry for the protagonist. But in fact, I don't think a good teacher would think that a hand-painted greeting card is any cheaper than expensive perfume, because it is a student's blessing and thought. Therefore, the negative influence on the hero is actually his own ideas, and his ideas are caused by the secular view of poverty.

When I read this, I found that poverty is not only physical, but also psychological misfortune for the protagonist. The rift between parents can tear the family apart and cause irreparable damage to the child.

It's interesting to point out that low-income areas also have resources that they can use. This reminds me of the poor rural areas in southern China, where the government's idea of "turning the countryside into a scenic spot" is to turn the woods and surrounding areas into open tourist destinations, and organically combine B&Bs, restaurants and bookstores to bring more and better job opportunities and living places for local villagers while preserving the original texture and rural characteristics.

I agree that low wages are the cause of poverty for most people. I was reminded of a documentary I once saw about a billionaire who believed that poverty was caused by individual laziness, so he decided to experience working as a sanitation worker for a month to see if he could make a difference. And he gave up on the third day, finding that his heavy workload made it impossible for him to think about the future. He did everything he could to get enough to eat every day.

I really like the author's point of view here, which fully takes into account the plight that poor students may face and provides support for their development. The author made me realize that poverty's influence on students may be subtle, perhaps in psychological or other aspects, and also made me realize that educators should not make negative assumptions about poor students, but give them help.

The link between race and poverty is an important finding. This proves both that race is systemic and that poverty is continuous. It is precisely because of the discrimination and prejudice against ethnic minorities in the past that they have less resources and wealth, which makes their children more prone to poverty.

It is really a vicious circle for poor students, because some students' families can't even afford the tuition and living expenses of students. At the same time, the inferiority complex that poverty brings to students may also make them tired of learning psychology, so that they do not go to school. So their poverty will continue, even to the next generation.

Personally, I think the previous student's comment is a good proof that poverty is relative. However, I think what is being discussed here is poverty in its absolute sense. For the absolute poor, the examples discussed in the article are optimistic. In some developing and backward countries, some children even have trouble getting fed and clothed, and have no possibility to receive education at all. Many of their families are broken.

I agree with the previous classmates that poverty is not a single factor, it is a collection of many small factors that lead to poverty. What's more, this sentence also tells us that the negative effects brought by poverty are continuous and causal, because poverty will make people have to make unfavorable choices in the face of difficulties, which will lead to a more difficult life. It also means that people who are poor themselves can hardly escape the fate of poverty.

I have some knowledge of rural poverty. When I was in high school, I organized a research project to explore poor rural areas in western China. Here I observed that the villages were so sparsely populated that I could hardly see anything but old people and children. This is because the advancement of urbanization makes the rural labor force go to the city to work, which leads to the waste of rural land. Through interviews and investigations, I also found that local poverty is mainly caused by three factors: disease, education and natural disasters.

In fact, I think this is true of most Asian parents, especially Chinese parents. They attach great importance to their children's grades and school rankings, which in China directly affect their future achievements. In today's era of intensified internal examination, not only parents, but also students themselves are very utilitarian view of their own grades and school rankings.

I love that line. I share the same position with the author. In my opinion, school is a sacred place, and the students it educates are the future hope of this society. Therefore, hegemonism and class system are not acceptable in the school. The school should be a utopia that dares to subvert the hegemony of knowledge and treats all students equally.

As mentioned in the article, silence is what most Asian-Americans do when they are subjected to racial discrimination. I guess this may be related to the following aspects: 1. In our own culture, for example, there is a famous saying in Chinese culture, "Endure for a while, the wind is calm; Take a step back. The sky is the limit." 2. Speaking out as a minority can have more serious consequences. 3. Some AsiAn-Americans (who did not grow up in the US) have a language barrier to some extent.

I applaud the point made here that white children realize at an early age that they are at the top of the racial hierarchy. It is hard to imagine that my first racist incident in America was brought upon me by a group of white children who appeared to be schoolchildren. They stopped me and my Chinese friends in and out next to uci and said that his relatives at uci had power to expel us Chinese students.

I am curious about the mention of black students as the main attackers. What makes them attack Asian students? Is it because they are also discriminated against and because Asians are the model minority?

It is interesting here to point out that AsiAn-Americans are bicultural, with a strong assimilation to "Americana" but also exhibit a strong ethnic origin or pan-Asian identity. I guess their sense of identity with American culture is caused by environmental factors. Their living experience in America brings them a sense of belonging. And their sense of Asian identity has to do with traditional Asian cultures, which emphasize the importance of ancestry and the idea of family.

It is interesting to see how white officials described Chinese immigrants in the 1850s. We can see that "dangerous" and "docile" are antonyms of each of these four words, but they both describe AsiAn-Americans. This is reasonable, we can understand the meaning behind these two words, but white officials on the one hand to squeeze the power of Asians, but also fear the retaliation when they reach their limits. And "different" and "dirty" are the disgust and contempt of white officials because of the class gap. This proves once again that discrimination against AsiAn-Americans is systematic.

I have to admit that this is why I admire American education. Just as the text says, we should learn the real history and face it correctly, because it can avoid repeating the mistakes in our future. Instead of covering up past mistakes for the sake of reputation and face.

I also know to some extent that the high suicide rate of Asian American women is closely related to depression, social pressure and self-identity. In today's society, the vast majority of people suffer from some degree of depression, and human psychology is far more fragile than we think.

The phenomenon presented here is interesting, and the author clearly captures the psychology of some students who skip classes. I learned that the reason why some students do not attend classes is not simply to have fun, but that some classes are considered boring and meaningless to them, or even not as effective as self-study.

It is not uncommon for school officials here to tend to blame students and parents for their own educational failures. They expect too much of all students, and expect all students to learn all knowledge in the shortest incident and the simplest method of indoctrination. Obviously this is not realistic. I once heard a professor whom I respect very much say, "If you've learned what I'm going to teach you, what are you doing here?"

I think this proposal is a success. A diverse staff allows children from different cultures and backgrounds to quickly find a sense of belonging and presents a positive and healthy school ethos to the outside world.

It is interesting to see the difference between the perspective of parents and the perspective of teachers. For the parents, their children are brought up by them, they have just experienced the most vulnerable period of their children, so the parents are more careful and cautious with their children. For teachers, they are more aware of the general situation of children in primary school, so they are more daring. Therefore, the friction between teachers and parents arises, but as long as their core is for the good of children and active communication, then through the cooperation between school and family, children will grow up more healthily.

The idea that one of the main sources of stereotypes mentioned here is often the teacher education programs themselves is interesting. This reminds me of what I learned in Social Science 3A. In that class we talked about the issue of iq tests in the '90s, which were unfair to black people because they were tested in white culture. This coincides with the point made here.

I agree that it is easy for teachers to misread students' talents, intentions or abilities when there is a significant difference between student culture and school culture. In China, due to the large population base, the philosophy in most schools is that grades are the most important and the only thing that matters (despite the call for a liberal education). So students' lives are swamped with tests and exercises, and many students' talents in other areas are buried. Not only in China, now with the emergence of social internal examination, standardized scores become more and more important, which has become one of the factors that kill students' personality.

This reminds me of a real event that happened to me some time ago. When I was playing a game on the computer, someone abused me, and the content of the abuse made me feel strange as a foreigner. They call each other the n word. In retrospect, it's clear that this was a stereotype that led to discrimination against people of color.

This description got me thinking about stereotypes. I think it's important to emphasize not only the black character, but also the female character. As mentioned in the article, contemporary women are shown as "promiscuous queen, seductress, dissolute woman, gold digger" and other images, which are evidence of the current patriarchal society. The objectification of women through various media has helped the control of women by men in power and male chauvinists in society. I believe that such attitudes and behaviors can and can only be changed through education.

I can't agree more with the idea that teenagers face an awakening of their self-knowledge, because I've experienced it myself, although it happened to me before puberty. When I was nine years old, I traveled to other countries for the first time, and I really came into contact with people of different colors, races, and beliefs. This made me think about my identity, and I began to discover my own feature.