Payne states that impoverished students face inequality at school, insinuating that the school should be responsible for helping to provide for these students so that they can have a better education. Gorski sees that responsibility lies most likely with us, who can aid teachers in offering a hand, as they are underpaid and are not able to do much on their own. The two authors have clashing ideas as to why students are in poverty: Payne believes that the impoverished students are lazy and have their own set of
Everything academic revolves around the year-end state testing to the point that other subjects are usually neglected. Reading, math and writing are the main thrusts of schools, and are obviously important. However, critics state that children are not receiving well-rounded educations because of the emphasis on these subjects
If parents are paying the exceeded taxes. There is a sufficient amount of money for public schooling especially with a big population in the city. By threatening the public educational system with budget cuts, this is just a way to deteriorate the quality of learning. Getting rid of teachers is not a intelligent way of saving money. The Board of Education wants the best for students by closing schools, a lot can’t be accomplished by establishing closures across the country.
Finally, the most negative aspect is that the standardized testing is not a valid measure of learning for educating students because the inhibition of standardized testing for teachers and the learning materials that would make both teachers and students in a hole. The government needs to found a more reliable measure of performance with the appeal of validity, simplicity and cost-effectiveness. Also, those education technology such as home schooling need to be funded or supported by government as well. Therefore, although the standardized testing system was used to play an instructive, beneficial and important role in the educational arena, the deleterious effects of this testing
Students who drop out often have many factors that influence their decision. Research shows that key factors for students who are at highest risk of dropping out are: poor grades in core classes, low or poor attendance, failure to be promoted to the next grade, disengagement in the classroom, and behavioral problems (Kennelly, 2007). Student boredom, lack of challenging material, and disengagement due to lack of academic rigor have also been identified as indicators of academic failure. In recent years; the legislation of No Child Left Behind Act has contributed to a situation in which educators are caught between a rock and a hard place. Knowing that students are a greater risk of dropping out when they perform poorly in school, yet increased rigor in the classroom as a strategy to decrease the dropout rate, as identified in the No Child Left Behind Act has created a “Catch-22” situation for educators (Bridgeland J. D., 2009).
The schools are generally over crowded with few good teachers. When there's a great public school there is not enough space for every child in the neighborhood. Children are stuck in low achieving schools because of how the school districts are divided. A lot of children end up in poor public schools because their parents do not possess the income that it takes to send them to a private school. Since 1971 education cost has increased from $4,300 to more than $9,000 per student.
Through this correlation, one can see how such factors can keep children in impoverished homes throughout their lives. Education is a social problem in the mix of poverty. In many low-income cities, a good education is very rare for many leaders of the household. This lack of education usually results in generational poverty. In other words, children end up following in their parent’s footsteps by dropping out of school at a young age.
Noguera selected Oakland Unified Public School systems. The population of students consists of mostly “poor, immigrant, and non whites” (p. 89) who according to Noguera, financial circumstances affect the ability to leave, thus students are stuck attending failing schools. Noguera states that differences in per pupil spending as well as social and financial inequities affect local controls on schools. Noguera believes there are four influencing factors affecting local control. Funding from local tax revenues and community resources to generate additional income from poor families is smaller than that of affluent neighborhoods.
Public school systems are intended to provide an equal and substantial education to all children who are enrolled from kindergarten through the twelfth grade in high school. However, many urban neighborhoods such as the areas in inner city Houston have been neglected in being provided with education that is of equal stature of those who reside in suburbs and smaller cities. Although budget cuts have happened to schools in the Houston area, urban area schools have been more affected by these cuts before their budgets were lower to begin with. Therefore, urban area schools lack access to education equal to those in suburban areas. This failure to provide equal education is due to economic inequality, teacher quality, and size difference between
It’s hard to put a stop to this because it can happen for a variety of reasons. Various reasons may include that a student’s parents are not in the picture, the kids are rebelling against the school’s authority, or even that the parents (or town) simply don’t have the means to transport the child to school. For instance, the Waterbury School District has a chronic absenteeism rate of 16.2%, whereas in the Westport School District, the chronic absenteeism rate is only 2.5% (CT Data, 2016). If children aren’t attending school on a regular basis, they are engaging in the cycle of poverty. The cycle of poverty is a vicious one and receiving an education is pivotal to breaking that cycle.