Social Class Decisions Research Paper

There is much debate about the issue of social class in the United States. There are arguments about whether social classes are distinctly separate or fluid, dependent upon one’s community or society as a whole, and if they are subjective or objective (Hughes and Jenkins). However, despite the debate surrounding social classes, it is still important to try to define them and analyze their effects, as they are such an important part of our identity and our opportunities in society. Although our society has tried to appear as though we have no classes, and it is becoming harder to tell what class someone is in by material goods, classes do still exist today (Scott and Leonhardt). The trend has been to divide the U.S. into four major

How far a student can go in life is already pre-determined by the generation before him. Success is no longer made up of solely intellectual ability, but rather if the streets the student walks through is gang-ridden or not, if their parents are absentees, and other conditions in which the child grows up in. Valerie Strauss expresses these concerns in her article, “What the Numbers Really Tell Us About America’s Public Schools” in which she discusses how income levels correlate with students’ success rate which is further accentuated through Kamiak and Mariner High School’s Standardized Test Results. “Motivation, a Major Factor in U.S. Student Test Performance” by Dian Schaffhauser continues this idea of external problems affecting low scores

Introduction In the United States, there is an achievement gap between middle and upper class students and low-income students. Children who are from middle to upper class families are outperforming students living in poverty on standardized tests. Although, all children are learning the same information, but the experiences they endure outside of school has an impact the learning process. Poverty has a direct correlation in the quality of education certain children receive, and then it impacts test scores.

The widening achievement gap contributed to inequality of wealth in the classroom is a topic that educators tackle on a daily basis. In his article The Widening Income Achievement Gap, Sean Reardon discusses how, historically, lower income students have not performed at the level of higher income students (Reardon, 2015). What causes this disparity in academic achievement? Is it simply access to money that gives students from higher income families a leg up when it comes to school or are there deeper, farther reaching contributing factors?

Kids that come from wealthier families have done better on standardized tests than those children that are from lower class or poor families. The kids in the wealthier families are simply getting better test scores because there families

In the data collected by College Board that shows the relationship between family income and the average test scores, students from a family which has a income of lower than 20,000 dollars per year would get a score around 1326, and students from a rich family which has a income of more than 200,000 dollars can get a score around 1714. It reflets that fact that

African Americans and Latinos have the lowest average SAT scores compared to other races. This may be due to the fact that the income gap between races has remained. According to the New York Times article, “No racial or ethnic group experienced significant changes in income, but that left the gap between Asians, at the top, and blacks, at the bottom, as wide as before. The median income for Asian households was $68,600. For non-Hispanic whites, it was about $57,000, while the typical Hispanic household had an income of $39,000, and blacks were at $33,300.”

On average, students who come from families who make up to twenty thousand per year get around a thirteen hundred on the SAT (Jaschik). While students whose families make eighty to one hundred thousand make about a fifteen hundred on the test. Lastly those who come from an income of over two hundred thousand dollars make around 1700 on the test (Jaschik). This obviously shows those with a lower income tend to make a lower score on the SAT than the students with money. This bias on allowing those with money who can afford classes and all the SAT help needed, is unfair to those who don’t have the resources to study like this. From this information, one may go on and find out more on families with low income. The percentages of families with a low income are: thirty percent Hispanic, twenty two percent African American, and six percent are other people of color (Simms). This just helps show the reader that those of lower income tend to be people of color. Going back to the SAT with this information fresh, Blacks make an average of 1278 on the SAT, Hispanics make an average of 1345, and Whites make an average of 1576 (Jaschik). Based on the information on income and the statistics of what races tend to make on this test, one can determine that those with lower income tend to not do as well on the test as those of

At the very core of nearly every aspect of the modern life, social class can be seen pulling at the strings, orchestrating every move. From the obvious, like salary, housing, and friends, to the more subtle, like fashion, news, and art, social class is at the center of it all. However, one thing that social class is rarely ever attributed to, is religion. Surprising as it may be, social class directly affected American's choice of religion, and whether or not they have a religion, throughout the entirety of the 1900s.

is through socioeconomic status. According to Sean Reardon, a main outcome of the widening income gap for families has been a widening gap in achievement among children, which he refers to as the income achievement gap (Reardon, 2011). Therefore, the children of the poor remain at an educational disadvantage when their parents’ income becomes as much of a predictor of their educational achievements, as their parents’ educational obtainment. To emphasize the results of the income achievement gap, Reardon states, “As the children of the rich do better in school, and those who do better in school are more likely to become rich, we risk producing an even more unequal and economically polarized society” (Reardon, 2011, p. 111). For example, as standardized testing shifted towards standardized achievement testing to determine a student’s academic achievement, parental investment in their children’s cognitive development began to increase. Educational disparities occur when affluent families can very easily afford tutoring outside of the classroom for their children to perform highly, while children being raised in impoverished homes are at a disadvantage, and at a lower chance of doing well on these exams. This becomes problematic when SAT reading, math, and writing scores increase with income as exemplified by the disproportionately small amount of minority students in higher education (Brand lecture,

The SAT is biased against students of lower-income households. In modern society, people rely on money. While the American government may give students a free twelve year education, there are strings attached. Standardized tests are not taken without preparation. It requires practice tests, study guides, tutors, and countless hours of time. The problem for poor students is that they may not be able to afford any practice. One might ask how they prepare? They do not. The Christian Science Monitor talks about how money plays a crucial role when it comes to the SAT by saying, “Expensive test-prep courses may give affluent students a marginal advantage…” (Khadaroo). Wealth equals success. The more money a person has, the more professional tutoring they can receive before taking the SAT which makes it unfair to students who cannot afford additional help. New York Times reported that College Admissions met to discuss the importance of the SAT and

The chart above posted by Zachary Goldfarb on the Washington Post further shows that if a student’s family is more affluent, that student is likely to do better. If standardized testing is going to test students as equals, then all the prep material should be made available for all students no matter what income level a student’s family is in.

Yes, there are those who are indeed poor and score very well on their standardized tests. An argument that could easily arrive is that there are individuals that are of lower income who do end up scoring very well on their standardized test. To that argument, there is an acknowledgement of human agency, which allows humans to choose, and to behave intentionally. By adding human agency, student’s behavior cannot be determined, but rather probabilistic. Humans have intentions that natural science cannot define or explain on its own. There are individuals who are of lower income that score very well on their SAT, there are also individuals who are of higher income that score very poorly on their SAT. However as a society, the majority of students who come from a lower income family, generally score lower than the majority of students who come from a higher income

American society is a complicated web of networks that interconnect to produce a functioning system that people look to for guidance. History repeats itself all the time and society is always mirroring the past. Today, our societies’ boundaries are still debated about heatedly. Race, class, and gender help create these boundaries and as Foner wrote, “our imagined community will continue to be a source of political conflict and social struggle” (Foner).

As mentioned earlier there are stereotypes that come with socioeconomic status, including that children from low socioeconomic status families tend to not perform as well in school as children from higher socioeconomic status families. This is not because the children from low socioeconomic status have a deficiency that causes them to underperform, but rather it is because there is an expectation that the children will not do as well and so the children walk into the classroom facing a losing battle (Schmitt-Wilson, 2013, p 228). The education that a child receives in the earliest years of their life sets up a framework for the education through the rest of their lifetime (Stull, 2013, p 54). That being said, if a child does not receive the best education in the earliest years of their schooling, it is not surprising when they do not do as well in school and do not seek higher education after high school. Another common stereotype is that children from low socioeconomic status will not go on to get high paying jobs, but even if this is true it is not