“ (Moore 141). While Moore focuses more on the advertising established into school and companies promoting themselves using schools, Gatto speaks more one the effect that this way of schooling creates the adults in the world. Also he explains how marketing on the school systems is keeping the adults nowadays very “childish” or young in the mind. (Gatto 149) According to Gatto if you strip children of all of their independence, and only develop their trivial emotions, they would never truly grow up. (Gatto 154).
Anyon does think that more research needs to be done to clearly show how economic status has a direct connection to the role in children’s education. What I think one of the key aspects of Anyon’s essay is the examples that were given for each school and how the social class affected the teaching. Examples were given by what the teacher said and how he/she taught, I was able to put myself in the classroom and see how I would have handled learning. Starting with the working-class schools, Anyon observed how teachers didn’t explain the work, how it would relate to other lessons, or the point of learning. I feel if you don’t understand the point of something, what is the point of learning?
While Payne argues that there is a culture of poverty, Gorski states that, rather than a culture of poverty being existent, classism is that which permeates the classrooms and schools. Payne believes that impoverished students live by different rules and values than students of the middle and upper classes, such as how they see money, clothing, family structure, etc. Likewise, Gorski believes that impoverished students do have different values and goals than those of middle and upper clases, and he says that the rules found in schools do not often benefit those living in poverty, but benefit those living in middle and upper class. With regards to impoverished students’ values and goals, both tend to point to the idea that faculty in schools should help to reshape the values and goals of impoverished students. Payne stated that students should learn the “hidden rules” of the middle class from their educators so that they have another set of rules to use if they choose to do so.
So society is said to be meritocratic, as everybody can achieve if they want to. Durkheim (2002) Believes that there are fixed rules for all and by transmitting the norms and values across society, it is then fair and meritocratic. Marxists on the other hand believe that meritocracy is a myth and that it hides the truth of the inequality in society. Sociologists argue that the processes in school such as the hidden curriculum helps to keep society unequal. The hidden curriculum has a big influence on pupils, its one thing to teach the child educationally but if the child is treated unjustly (no voice) by the school system then a much more negative message is given to those pupils about the nature of society.
But seeing a world of hate, and discrimination through the eyes of Klugar and Amara, it is almost impossible to separate the two. Amara’s link of religion to social class is shown through her recollection of her peers view of her based on theses factors alone. “At school, along with the other children from the housing project, we were called the “kids from Herbet,” which was a way of identifying our neighborhood as the Arab quarter” pg.48. The way her schoolmates write her off as just being another herbet kid, shows the superior attitude that must have been prevalent around them. Kluger’s religion and ethnicity shaped the entire course of her life as well.
That parents stress to children the importance of education all their school lives, but they continue to give money things that are less important, instead they should put money towards the teachers who wants to help make a difference in every child's life. Barber believes that parents should actually display their actions that they care and value their education. He explains who are to blame for the lack of quality education in America. The generations before the young and the government have a partial blame in why the school system is failing. Barber's argument is more superior, because he takes the sociopolitical context of education in to account, where as Henry does not.
An educational facility that is given adequate resources has a much better chance of pushing the boundaries of education and developing new and effective methods of learning. Currently, many teachers are required to pull money out of their own pocket just to acquire the materials needed for their class to finish the curriculum. These teachers are being barred from a right to think freely about how their students think because of budgeting. The only way to improve education standards in the U.S. is to show the proper respect to it, both socially and out of our
For example, failing schools are often turned into academies which then specialise in one area and receive investment from the private sector. This makes them more attractive and the school improves. It can, however, be argued that the National Curriculum does not ensure that all pupils receive the same education; private schools, grammar schools and faith schools are exempt from it and get to place emphasis on certain areas in education that they wish to focus on. Also, Coard would suggest that the curriculum is ethnocentric and centres on British society and history and so all the pupils do not receive a similar education. Marxists would also say that the National Curriculum does not ensure a standard education throughout the education system because the education system places more value on middle class knowledge than on working class knowledge and so they are disadvantaged and receive a different education to other classes.
Freire believes that through teachers, students turn important education into pure memorization, and therefore cannot utilize the full potential of the knowledge given to them. In his essay, “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education,” he writes that in order for students to avoid being turned into receptacles of useless knowledge, they must “meekly…permit themselves to be filled by the teacher” (244). One can easily allow themselves to be “banked” on, therefore oppressing their education, or they can prevent their mind from being fed useless information, and turn the information they are learning into useful knowledge. Writer Richard Rodriguez talks about how he was always striving for more and more education in his essay, “The Achievement of Desire.” He explains he was always, “too eager, [and] too anxious,” (598) to learn more in school, and was never satisfied with the knowledge at hand. Rodriguez exemplifies that he strove to be the best he could be, and was successful based off his own hard work.
Simple numbers don’t lie and it’s not hard to prove inequality in Americas education system. If your born a shade of color other than pink in this country your chance for a first rate education automatically lessens, even more so if your born poor. I believe its imperative for teachers to leave all their stereotypes at the door of the classroom and try to understand how different social-cultural influences have shaped their students. We don’t all get the same opportunities at home but school should be the great equalizer, where a student’s success isn’t based on factors they can’t control but by the factors they can. Funding for schools in this country is grossly disproportionate to educational needs.