After school programs, ensuring all schools have equal funding, getting better at determining which kids aren't succeeding, and spending more time with them to give them the one on one support they need. I mean it's a very hard problem, and maybe it's unsolvable, but I think we have a lot more things we can try before giving up and trying to put Band-Aids on the problem.
I think if class sizes are sufficiently small though, at least in grade school, a teacher should know every student, and be able to identify those who aren't getting the support they need at home. If they are a good teacher, they can act accordingly, and maybe work with the parents to help the child succeed.
"Bad school" is not the one without a freshly refurbished swimming pool. It's the one with poor discipline, parents who don't care and a principal who has no idea how to work with kids.
Those are all great ideas, but the disadvantaged children in the schools this mechanism is trying to help probably don't go to schools that offer those benefits.
Well yes...the person you're replying to is saying that those schools should get enough funding (and whatever else) so that they can offer those benefits.
Or perhaps we should just even out the funding. Crudely redistributing wealth is a historically very poor way to solve inequality (assuming it is a problem), since it doesn't address the root cause. Investing in education, in particular trades, is an arguably better way. They are practical, have the most bang-for-buck value, and are not time-consuming or demanding.
I think if class sizes are sufficiently small though, at least in grade school, a teacher should know every student, and be able to identify those who aren't getting the support they need at home. If they are a good teacher, they can act accordingly, and maybe work with the parents to help the child succeed.