Low- Income Families Access to Better Education Essay

In " Free College Doesn't Fix Everything,” Richard Reeves, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. Said that Community colleges in the United States can, in theory, provide an important service. not everyone has the same opportunity to earn a bachelor's degree. Most high school students from rich families will end the university, some of humble origin will join them. At this time, the system of institutions in the United States serves to reinforce inequality from generation to generation, rather than reduce it. However, some students do not get into college, or do not finish their studies, and this is not only economically-financial situation is also due to the weakness that has America in education. However,

Kozol (1991) explained in his book how one would think that because they live in a free nation and they are entitled to a free education, that they would receive the same as everyone else. Unfortunately, our country was set up with a tax-based formula for school funding. It’s a complicated formula and most people never think to scrutinize it. Basically, taxes based on the values of homes are levied. It is an equal tax in all districts so it is equitable. Ironically, because the properties in poor areas are worth far less than in affluent areas, there is always a shortage. The Shortage in funding creates a significant difference in teacher quality, curriculum and resources Former Secretary John King (2016) explained how schools with highly concentrated Blacks and Latinos are less likely to offer advanced

In this detailed and shocking book, Jonathan Kozol describes the horrific and unjust conditions in which many children in today’s society are forced to get their education. Kozol discusses three major reasons for the discrepancies in America’s schools today: disparities of property taxes, racism, and the conflict between state and local control. The first of these reasons is that of the differences of available property tax revenues. Kozol discusses the inconsistencies in property tax revenues and the problem that the poorer districts aren’t getting the same opportunities for education as the more affluent neighborhoods. He says the reason for this is that the

“Education is a major driver of development and is a strong instrument for reducing poverty, improving health, gender equality, peace, and stability” (The World Bank) - so why is it that students are often deprived from an extensive education? In Illinois, education funding has been an ongoing problem. Funding for schools is based on the property taxes where the schools are located, causing those who live in lower socioeconomic areas to receive less educational funding. This is unfair because children who live in lower socioeconomic areas are not able to receive the same opportunities and benefits that are acquired when a quality education is obtained. This is why educational funding in Illinois should be distributed evenly so that every

Research in the past decade on the widening gap of educational opportunities between lower and higher income families has shown that children enrolled schools that predominantly serve lower income families tend to have lower pedagogical success and more negative associations regarding the American education system.

The resources available to an urban, lower income school are to be equal to those available to a suburban, higher income school. Two schools in New York, one from a wealthy school district and one from a poor district, were given computers. The State provided the same number of computers to each school, therefore claiming to evenly supporting each school. However, the school with the poorer children had a larger number of students; the nicer school had twice the number of computers in proportion to the number of their students (Kozol 84). It seems that the biggest factor keeping the children of lower income homes behind is the school funding available. The poorer school district does not have the money to spend on the things a wealthier district may, but there is no real evidence that spending money makes much difference in the outcome of a child's education. In many cases, family and background have a greater influence on how well a child does in school (Kozol 176-77). Richard Kahlenberg, a member of the Century Foundation, says, "Research findings and common sense tell us that the people who make up a school—the students, parents, and teachers—matter more (Lewis 648)

America’s school system and student population remains segregated, by race and class. The inequalities that exist in schools today result from more than just poorly managed schools; they reflect the racial and socioeconomic inequities of society as a whole. Most of the problems of schools boil down to either racism in and outside the school or financial disparity between wealthy and poor school districts. Because schools receive funding through local property taxes, low-income communities start at an economic disadvantage. Less funding means fewer resources, lower quality instruction and curricula, and little to no community involvement. Even when low-income schools manage to find adequate funding, the money doesn’t solve all the school’s

Today, the cost of attending many public colleges is so high that a lot of students simply can't afford to. As a result, far fewer students from lower-income

Michigan’s students perform near the bottom in national rankings and are on a downward trajectory (Higgins). This is partially a result of curricula throughout the state of Michigan failing to put students in a position to succeed. Many school districts and teachers struggle with developing curricula and lesson plans given time and budget constraints; this is especially prevalent in low-income and minority school districts where teachers are younger and less experienced (French). A prime example of curricula hurting student achievement is a story told at a Michigan ISD assessment and improvement representative meeting of schools “teaching” by having students copy words out of the dictionary as the teacher did not have the skills/capacity/time to create a better lesson. Alarmingly, this type of experience is common as “there’s no support, you’re woefully unprepared, and you’re totally isolated. You’re trying to put these lesson plans together at 10 o’clock at night, and you have to be up at 5 getting prepped. You’re making this curriculum up as you’re going it alone.” (French). All of this in the face of ever changing state standards forcing teachers to constantly change their curricula.

With an increase in rigor in classrooms throughout the United States, there is often the question of its effects for students in low income schools. In addition to the school setting, rigor is also a key factor in quality education. But, will rigor have an impact on these students in high poverty areas? Or will this increased rigor lead to added frustration? In recent years, it has been found that if the level of rigor is increased in the classroom, students of all backgrounds will show improvement on standardized tests. However, due to achievement gaps in low income schools, in comparison to more affluent schools, the level of rigor will require adjustments to meet the needs of the population.

Eight hours a day, five days a week, give or take forty-four weeks a year, this is a regular school year for a child between the ages of six to eighteen has to endure. Everyday, there are many students and families who struggle in order to get by day by day, and no matter how many times parents try to ask for help, the government turns its back on them. The pleas from the families get turned down because of one reason, they "make too much income." More and more this issue of families having to struggle with poverty grows in the United States, however, this doesn't only effect students between the ages of six to eighteen, but also those who attempt to strive for a higher education. Adults struggle to receive the education they desire, yet aren't

“ Historically, low-income students as a group have performed less well than high-income students on most measures of academic success” (Reardon, 2013). Typically low-income families come from low-income parts of the state making a school that does not have as much funding as a higher economic schools does lack in resources for their students. The school then has lower paid teachers and administrators, with lower quality supplies. This results in a school which typically has faculty who do not perform as well as the well-funded schools. “The law fails to address the pressing problems of unequal educational resources across schools serving wealthy and poor children” (Hammond, 2007). Students from low and high income families will not be able to achieve the same education because their education simply is not the same.

One of the greatest differences among public schools is the funding they receive. Public schools across the country have incredibly varied amounts of capital dedicated to them which in turn leads to a disparity in the quality of education a student will receive at these schools. The race of a student, the location they live in, and the wealth of their family greatly correlate to the level of education they will receive. As Harvard professor Jennifer L. Hochschild notes, “Districts with a lot of poor students have lower average test scores and higher dropout rates...The highest spending districts report high test scores, and some of the lowest spending districts report the lowest test scores” (“Social Class in Public Schools.”). The students who attend schools that receive less funding typically obtain an education that is lesser in comparison to schools that receive more money. The inequality in funding within a state has a severe impact on the variation of education quality. In the case of Connecticut, “The district that spends the most provides almost twice as much per student as the district that spends the least” (“Social Class in Public Schools.”). As a result, the schools that receive less funding work with more outdated textbooks and equipment, while schools with more funding can afford to buy new equipment and provide a better environment for the

The main argument for this article is if schools keep providing the same interventions to high-poverty schools, they are going to keep getting the same academic achievement results. Schools of high- poverty population must begin think outside the box and create learning environments where students are reaching higher levels of achievement. Differentiated lessons are powerful tools; however this type of instruction can only be provided in short periods of time. Therefore, schools could implement Modularized Continuous Progress (MCP) model to provide effective instruction in reading and math. This model will help close the academic gap in high-poverty classrooms. Today, interventions seems to be effective only after third grade. Therefore, schools

Department of Education, “documents that schools serving low-income students are being shortchanged because school districts across the country are inequitably distributing their state and local funds”. (Education, 2011). Students that come from low income families are not given the equal chance to get the education that students from high income families get. If students are not given the tools they need to be educated, then they will have a poor chance of succeeding in the world.