Meet Elio, a seven-year
old boy who loves reading. Where he lives, in the South of Bronx, New York,
funds for the construction of schools are scarce and, consequently, school
libraries are reconstructed for use as classrooms. Elio is deprived of literary
resources essential for expanding his imagination beyond the walls of poverty
that surround him (Kozol 48). Bright children like Elio, and other African American
students of the inner-cities across the U.S, hold a right to enjoy the same
resources that the students of predominantly white and wealthy suburban schools
are privileged to have.
Furthermore, the uprisings
of teacher protests in central Chicago shines light on the fact that fewer
funds are given to public schools of inner-cities than to the public schools of
surrounding suburbs. Unfortunately, low-income families are deprived of school
choice since most affluent neighborhoods with privileged schools do not contain
low-income housing. Clearly, the state governments’ public education funding
and real estate policies are in need of reform; it is unfair that race,
location, and economic status of parents should determine the quality of a
child’s education.
Wealth status has the
most control over a parent’s choice of schools, which places higher-income families
at an unfair advantage for a better education and places lower-income families
at a disadvantage. Jennifer Jellison Holme highlights the fact that “Federal
and, in most places, state tax policies permit deductions for real estate taxes
and for home mortgage interest. This means tremendous tax advantages for
wealthy families, which can and have moved out of inner cities and into
suburbs” (178).
On the other hand,
lower-income families (mostly Hispanic and African American) are forced to
attend poorer quality schools within the city as a majority of them cannot
afford to live in the larger homes in the suburbs. As this migratory trend
continues, a suburban “white belt” begins to grow around “black cities” (Adkins
243). This circumstance further segregates the wealthy white population from
minorities and encourages discrimination: people begin to stereotype the Black
and Hispanic students from the less prosperous schools of the cities as being
more unintelligent than the students from well-off schools in white suburbs.
A study that analyzes
the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) shows how there is a direct correlation
between a school’s location and its level of achievement. A map of the
geographic distribution of CPS high schools depicts how each high-achieving
school, represented by a star, is either located within or close to a
higher-income community area, represented in a darker color (Cullen 748). This
reveals how the government’s distribution of funding is unequal as the taxes
from high-income individuals only go to schools located in their district
allowing them to buy resources to make them successful. The graph also
illustrates the geographic segregation between the rich and poor as the
darkest, high-income areas are located on the perimeter of the city; whereas
the lighter, low-income areas remain in the middle where the standard schools
are located.
Another difficult
obstacle for lower-income families to overcome when choosing schools is that
most districts often make it obligatory for students to attend specific schools
in their neighborhoods. This system is unjust for poor students because to deny
a student the right to high quality education simply because they cannot afford
to live in a rich neighborhood is a violation of their constitutional promise
of equality.
The CPS study also
analyzes the freedom of school choice and how it affects academic performance.
Data for over 60,000 students in CPS high schools provide evidence that
“students who opt out of their assigned neighborhood school are 7.6 percentage
points more likely to graduate than peers” (730). This is due to the fact that
when co-opting, students choose to attend schools with “academically talented
peers who come from neighborhoods with higher socio-economic characteristics”
(755).
Not only does the
inefficient placing of homes prevent minorities in the cities from being able
to attend good schools, it is also the government’s unequal funding that
contributes to their downfall in academic performance. While some argue that
the government should provide more funds for higher achieving suburban schools,
poor urban schools are in greater need of more funds and can become successful
if the funds are used efficiently.
It is important to
realize that if “Roughly 100 Chicago schools, the third-largest school district
in the country where 87% of the students are from low-income families have
already been closed since 2001” (Younge), then the government is clearly not
providing the Chicago Public Schools with enough resources to maintain school
buildings and properly teach students.
State governments
should monitor the use of these schools’ funds to make sure that the money goes
towards relocating students and teachers to well-off schools for proper
teaching and to acquire tutors to help students with core subjects outside of
class. Most importantly, money should go toward the reconstruction of schools
during summer vacations so that they will not have to completely shut down or
relocate during the year and negatively affect 30,000 students. In fact, the
relocation of schools for many children in Chicago will mean higher student-to-teacher
ratios and even put them in harm as they will have to cross gang lines to get
to their new schools.
Many individuals
argue that it is only fair that the taxes being paid by the wealthy should go
towards the funds for schools located within their own communities. In
opposition to this, Professor Adkins explains that although “‘Beneficial’ local
taxation for purely local benefits (such as garbage collection) may be
appropriate for local support, ‘onerous’ taxation for purposes (like education)
which are of concern to the entire nation should be supported nationally” (244).
Once taxes have been
collected, it is ultimately up to the state governments and accreditation
agencies to allocate resources and determine the quality of schools
respectively. Therefore, it is not up to the general public to decide whether
their tax money goes to the already prosperous school in their neighborhood or
to less fortunate schools that can barely afford to pay a few teachers with a
large body of students.
What must be changed
to eliminate the overall inequality in education? In terms of geography, states
with heavily populated cities should implement a system like the Mount Laurel
Laws of New Jersey. As stated in the Yale Law and Policy Review, “The
Mount Laurel decisions seek to retard economic segregation by holding that
state constitutional general welfare limitations require a municipality’s
land-use regulations to provide for the municipality’s fair share of the
regional need for low- and moderate-income housing” (Payne 361). This will
slowly eliminate segregation between the urban and suburban communities, as
poor individuals can easily relocate to low-income homes located in richer
neighborhoods with high achieving schools.
In terms of money,
some propose that schools should cut back on funds for art, music, and physical
education. While it is true that schools can save a great deal of money without
these programs, they are necessary for both physical and mental health of students.
Given that obesity resides as a major problem, especially in poorer areas of
the U.S, schools must engage their students in physical activities to promote
good health and fitness. Liberal arts classes like painting, theater, music,
and literature are all necessary for the development of creative and analytical
thinkers.
Mark Slouka, in his
essay “Dehumanized,” emphasizes the importance of the skills that are taught by
liberal arts in a society that has recently begun to favor the sciences: “There
is no such life, that every aspect of life- every marriage, every job,
every parent-teacher meeting-hinges in some way on the ability to understand
and empathize with others, to challenge one’s beliefs, to strive for reason and
clarity” (40). These are the very programs that should be funded more within
the impoverished areas of cities to instill an open mindset and deliver a new
way of thinking for these students.
As long as the public
continues to view all minorities as inferior in regard to educational resources,
the government will continue to delay school building renovations and deny and
no improvement will occur. With a new system, similar to that of the Mount
Laurel Law, segregation between minorities and whites can decrease over time,
and students will find it easier to attend any school without feeling pressured
to assimilate into an affluent lifestyle.
Furthermore, if minority
students of the inner-cities were given the chance to attend privileged schools
that provided them with many resources, they would become motivated to work to
their fullest potential. Funds that are equally distributed from the
government, and if used efficiently, can help create better schools, increase
the percentage of graduates, and ultimately produce young scholars who can
benefit their communities and urban society.
Works Cited
Adkins, Arthur.
"Inequities Between Suburban and Urban Schools." Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development (1968): 243-45. ASCD. 1968.
Web. 17 November 2013. <http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_196812_adkins.pdf>.
Cullen, Julie Berry,
Brian A. Jacob, and Steven D. Levitt. "The Impact of School Choice on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Chicago
Public Schools." Journal of Public Economics 89 (2005): 729-60. Elsevier.
Elsevier B.V., 26 Aug. 2004. Web. 22 November 2013.
<http://faculty.smu.edu/millimet/classes/eco7321/papers/cullen%20et%20al.pdf>.
Holme, Jennifer J.
"Buying Homes, Buying Schools: School Choice and the Social Construction of
School Quality." Harvard Educational Review 2nd ser. 72 (2002):
177-205. Harvard Educational Review. Harvard Education Publishing
Group, 10 Apr. 2009. Web. 17 November 2013.
<http://her.hepg.org/content/u6272x676823788r/>.
Kozol, Jonathan.
"An Unequal Education. (Cover Story)." School Library Journal 46.5
(2000): 46. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 November 2013.
Payne, John M. Title
VIII and Mount Laurel: Is Affordable Housing Fair Housing? Yale Law and
Policy Review. 2nd ed. Vol. 6. N.p.: Yale Law and Policy Review Inc., 1988.
361-74. JSTOR. Web. 22 November 2013. < http://www.jstor.org/stable/40239290>.
“One of Naqvi's arguments is for real choice; funding following the student, which is described in defending charter schools, ideally provides such choice, though we know in reality, that's not the case. Leveling the playing field is, of course, far more complex. If my kids were stuck in a failing neighborhood school, I'd take advantage of the chance to move them to one that gives them the opportunity for success. I don't reject the notion of charter schools out of hand” –Richard Palzer
ReplyDeleteInstead of closing down Chicago’s public schools and advocating privatization through charter schools, what needs to be addressed is the disparities between charter schools and public schools’ economic resources for programs: the scarcity of textbooks and other essential materials for Chicago’s public-school students; the need for more school libraries and for an enriched curricula that include music, art, theatre, creative writing, and physical education; the need for more social workers, counselors, nurses and other support staff, to name just a few of the inequities.
What is most unfortunately connected to the charter school issue is the villainy of government officials and corporate-financed media and their attacks on public-school teachers; corporate-educational reform and the privatization of public schools by profiteers; the forced “turnarounds” subsidized by billionaires and their officiousness to “control and take over” public schools for self-interest and profit: thus, the closing and destruction of Chicago Public Schools and the resultant systematic destruction of their communities.
glen
In my state of Connecticut we have a very regressive state legislature arrangement and heavy dependence on property tax. The result is that each town is pitted against each other and suburban towns have a great resentment toward cities. Whenever a developer makes an affordable housing proposal in a suburban town, it invariably is shot down by the local zoning board. So ending de facto racial segregation isn't going to happen here. Private-run charter schools are proving to be a scam. The solution that never has been tried in CT is school vouchers: supported by the GOP, opposed by Democrats—because the latter party is heavily financed by teachers’ unions who see vouchers as a threat. I'm no big fan of partisan politics, caused primarily by careerist politicians whose first concern is maintaining finances to stay in office. However, here in CT where our state and city governments are on the verge of bankruptcy, trying vouchers on an experimental basis—perhaps just in our poorest city—is an experiment that we at least should allow on a trial basis. If it fails, the careerist politicians will have more campaign fodder. If it succeeds, government might actually prove useful for a change.
ReplyDelete