Disclosure: I am aware that this article is different from the normal, to appear on this site. However, I fully believe that our desire to learn and grow determines our success in life. As you'll read below there have been studies conducted proving this theory. However, I would like to be clear that I am not saying that I believe even one is entitled to succeed, and obtain a high-income lifestyle. I am just pointing out that education is a contributing fact to the widening income gap. In the past they have poured more money into the lower end schools, thinking this will increase the success of the students at the said schools. However, I do not believe that is a soul solution, for if the students do not have a desire to become better, no amount of funding is going to change that. Mindset is everything.
In this article, the problem of inequality in education and the widening achievement gap is the main focus. It will look at the research that Jean Anyon conducted in the 1980’s on inequality in schools based on the socioeconomic classes. In addition, the socioeconomic class is discussed, along with how the education we receive plays a vital role in our future success. Haigen Huang, a professor at the University of Missouri, conducted research in 2015, regarding the achievement gap based on SES in relation to student’s persistence. Huang research is also of main key focus. The whole purpose is to bring attention to the issue, that inequality in education is a growing problem that is not disappearing anytime in the near future.
Knowledge does not necessarily confer wisdom, and in spite of what popular manuals of psychology may say, education does not automatically give power. Nevertheless, it is the best long-range weapon with which mankind can battle against its environment. In helping the next generation to arm itself against future handicaps, it may be of more lasting values in improving standards than direct social action to deal with crisis situations. (Birely and Dufton 10)
According to The Bureau of Labor Statistics, there is a steadily widening gap in the distribution of income and wealth in the United States, with an increasing share of the resources accruing the top 5 percent of households. Although inequality in income is a problem, the Department of Labor believes the achievement gap is thought to being a contributing factor (Untied States). Table 1 from the Tax Foundation below, represents the income difference between those with a Bachelor Degree and those with only a high school degree, creating the widening achievement gap, showing how those with minimum education make consider less than those with additional education.
Table 1
Fig 1. United States
It could be argued that the people in that lower income bracket had the chance to attend college but chose not to. Thus they limited their own potential, however, that isn’t necessarily true, not all students have the opportunity to attend college.
Social class is one of those things that we, as Americans, are aware of yet still pretend doesn’t exist. We like to believe that America is a country of equal opportunity. However, according to Gregory Mantsio’s “Class in America 2009,” the number one myth about America is that “The United States is fundamentally a classless society” (283). This is sadly just a myth; we do in fact have distinct social classes abiding in America, and all of our opportunities are not equal, as we like to think. Further, the inequality between our classes is becoming greater.
Inequality in education is something that some people do not consider a problem because the majority of children in the Untied States have the privilege to attend public school and obtain a high school degree. However, the quality of education children receive may vary greatly across socioeconomic classes. Jean Anyon’s article, “From Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work, ” breaks down the inequality of education between the classes. In the 1980’s, Anyon researched the education received at five different elementary schools, in different parts of New Jersey. She did this by breaking the schools down into classes, based on the children’s parents’ profession’s and income. She labeled two as “working class schools,” those whose income was below or slightly about the 1980 poverty level. The third school was labeled as being middle class, where incomes were ranging from $13,00-$24,00, the fourth school is identified as an affluent professional school or simply the upper middle class, their incomes here were $40,000-$80,000. The last school was defined as the “Executive Elite.” Here, income range is not only higher, but much wider being anywhere from $100,000 to $500,000. The inequality in the incomes of the families, though, is not the main point; the noticeable difference in the education received is the troubling problem.
The research that Anyon conducted regarding the teaching methods of the working class schools can be condensed to this: everything the students do has a series of steps or procedures they must followed. Few explanations are given to the students about the purpose of a given task. Students are simply told to do it. There is also no room for creativity, and the students are not learning to think for themselves. It was observed here during Anyon’s research, that when a student did not understand the task assigned, the teachers would merely repeat the steps again; never once was additional help offered (167). When asked about the teaching of language arts, one teacher stated, “Simple punctuation is all they’ll ever use” (168). The teachers talked to the students in commands such as “ Shut your mouth” and “Open your books” (169). It can be gathered that the teachers at the working class schools do not treat the children with respect, nor think that investing time in these children is worth it.
On the other end of the socioeconomic scale, the Executive Elite school’s primary goal is “to conceptualize rules by which elements may fit together in systems and then apply these rules in solving a problem. Schoolwork helps one to achieve, to excel, to prepare for life” (175). The children at this school are encouraged to think things out logically and to ask questions on the subjects they are learning. In contrast to the working class schools, the Executive Elite view the language arts to be a highly important skill, which must be mastered (176). The teachers always call the children by name and enforce phrases such as “You are responsible for your work”(177). From Anyon’s research, it can be concluded that there is nothing equal about the education received at these schools. J. Coleman states “Inequalities imposed on children by their home, neighborhood, and peer environment are carried along to become the inequalities with which they confront adult life at the end of school “(qtd. in Huang 4).
Yet do we still believe that everyone has an equal chance to succeed? “Success in the United States requires no more than hard work, sacrifice, and perseverance: In American, anyone can become a millionaire, it’s just a matter of being in the right place at the right time”(Mantsios 281). This is another myth about America that Mantsio states, which we can now see is nothing more than a myth, it takes more than hard work to make it to the top. How can we say everyone has an equal chance at success when not all children are given the required skills to succeed at a high level? “Researchers have largely attributed achievement gaps between different groups of students in the United States to differences in resources, parent education, socioeconomic status (SES), and school quality” (Demerath 2937). Even more, “Most people live and die in the social class into which they were born. If they were born poor, chances are they will die poor”(“Social Class”). This is not saying that, if you were born into the working class, there is no hope of you making the economic change to the middle class or even the upper class, but it is implying that with the upbringing you have had, it would be extremely hard. Even if the children from working-class schools wanted to attend college, their chances are limited. “The probability that a top-scoring, low-income student completes college is about the same as the probability that a low-scoring high-income student does” (Waldron).
The problem of inequality in education and the widening achievement gap has been addressed. However possible solutions to the issues have not. According to Huang the fundamental assumption of the “American Dream” is that individuals are able to succeed through their own effort and persistence. In this view students from low-SES backgrounds should be able to overcome the obstacle of SES, never give up, and perform as well as their better- off peers. This diminishes Mantiso’s theory that the American dream is nothing more than a myth. The possibility that students themselves can narrow the achievement gap has been overlooked in the past.
The failure to explore this possibility might reflect the stance that many sociological and educational researchers take—that the SES-based achievement gap is a societal problem, thus it is problematic to advise economically disadvantaged students to try harder. However, the American cultural context posits a strong counterargument to this stance. The overarching American Dream encourages individuals to believe that they can achieve success in school and adulthood if they work hard enough. (Huang 3)
Huang is not implying that the social factor does not still play an important role in the achievement gap, but is indicating rather than focusing, on just the schools and teachers attitudes towards the students, as Anyon did. Huang is implying that parental, and other environmental factors could close the SES-based achievement gap. His focus is on the role students themselves can play in helping to narrow the gap. Huang provided research to prove his hypothesis. Huang did so by using both ANOVA, and two-level hierarchical linear models (HLM) to analyze the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) United States data. Huang broke the student groups down into four quadrilles, the first of low SES and fourth high, and conducted his research on two levels: the student level, and school level. Limiting his studies to three subjects: math, reading and science; then looking at the students SES, persistence, learning time in school allocated to each of the three subjects, and learning time after school. Huang derived the student’s level of persistence from a series of five questions asking to what extent they agreed with the following statements: 1) I give up easily when confronted with a problem, 2) I put off difficult problems, 3) I remain interested in the task that I started, 4) I continue working on tasks until everything is perfect, and 5) I do more than what is expected when confronted with a problem. Other controlled variables were involved in his researched such as school selectivity/admission policy, teacher shortage, percent of certified teachers, principal instructional leadership, school size, location, and parental involvement in schools (Huang 12).
Huang concluded from the ANOVA that the results indicate significant differences among the students in the four different quartiles.
Given that persistence and learning time in school were associated with students’ achievement in the three subjects, it seems that low-SES students might be able to catch up to their higher-SES peers by increasing their persistence and learning time in school. However, the ANOVA results indicated that low-SES students spent less time on learning and perceived themselves to be less persistent than their high-SES peers did. (Huang 21)
Table 2 below shows Huang’s results as learning time variable and persistence broken down into the four SES quartiles.
It can be noticed that not only does the fourth quartile spend more time out of school studying than the first quartile, they also have a higher persistence level. Meaning the students in the fourth quartile do not give up on a task as easily, and are more focused on achievement. Although the first quartile only studied 4 hours less than the fourth it can be noted that in this case “persistence and school allocated learning time, therefore, did not practically serve to help low-SES students catch up with their high-SES peers” (Huang 21)
The results are also proving that “you get out of it what you put into it,” the fourth quartile noticeably puts more time into their studies, thus they reap the benefit. Even though the educational quality of the first quartile is not as high of quality as the fourth that does not mean the students of the first should put less effort into their studies. Instead, they should try to learn the most they can, even if their education is of lower quality. Whereas Anyon contributed the main cause of inequality to the schools and the teachers, that isn’t necessarily true as we now can see. Students role in it plays a part, along with other outside factors other than the schools, the student's willingness and persistence to learn is perhaps the key to overcoming the achievement gap. Of course, the quality of the education at the low-income schools need to be improved, but even if that happens the students attending those schools would still be low-income students, their family backgrounds, parent involvement and home life would not change. It is up to the student himself or herself to decide if they want to put the time and effort to achieve a good education. The findings by Huang indicated “that persistence and learning time in school were significantly and positively related to students’ achievement, similar to what many studies have found These findings suggested that individual students were able to improve their achievement within their own microsystems “(qtd in Huang 22).
Looking back on Table 1, it is now easier to understand the gap. The SES-based achievement gap not only persists but has also been widening (qtd in Huang 3). In addition, S.F Reardon noted that.
The achievement gap between children from high- and low-income families is roughly 30 to 40 percent larger among children born in 2001 than among those born twenty-five years earlier (qtd in Huang 3).
The widening achievement gap is nothing to be taken lightly; the inequality that is occurring a crossed America is becoming a larger problem that we are going to have to confront sooner than later. There is no straightforward answer to the question, of how to fix the growing problem. However, this can be drawn from Huang research, there are three steps that would be taken to help eliminate the gap.
The strong association found in this study between achievement and persistence together with learning time in school highlighted the importance of the student’s role. So does this mean that students’ active role might overcome their disadvantage in SES? In other words, could low-SES students manage to perform as well as high-SES students through increased learning time in school and persistent pursuit of their goals in school work? In an ideal meritocratic society, the answer should be yes. Nevertheless, high-SES students generally spent more time on learning in school and viewed themselves to be more persistent in the sample. Learning time and persistence are not likely to help low-SES students overcome the SES constraint to catch up to their high-SES peers unless schools intentionally 1) increase learning time for low- SES students by providing them extra classes, and 2) encourage these students to establish more positive perceptions of their persistence. (Huang 24)
The solution that Huang suggests involves the participation of the schools, teachers, and the students. This is going back to Anyon’s research, which is based on the school’s and teachers being the main focus for the inequality growth. A group effort is required to conquer the gap.
The sad reality is that inequality has always existed, and it isn’t going away anytime soon. Although there have been projects done to try and help improve low-income schools education, such as the No Child Left Behind program, the outcome, however, did not create the desired effected, the gap continued to widen. There was high hope placed on this the NCLB program U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige stated, “Every single school in our nation now has an accountability plan that covers every student. This is revolutionary. This alone is a powerful change of cultures” (Hess and Finn 65). This, unfortunately, was incorrect. "The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) specifically listed closing the achievement gap between disadvantaged children and their more advantaged peers as one of its goals. Nevertheless, the achievement gap between students from low- and high-income families continued to grow “(Huang) Although the education system is responsible for providing children with the proper education, the first step to narrowing the gap, itself might lie in the student’s desire to excel, not as much as the quality of education provided.
For more information, take a look at the below publications:
Anyon Jean. “From Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work.” Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen,and Bonnie Lisle. Boston. Bedford/St.Martin’s.2013.163-179.Print.
Birely Derek and Dufton Anne. An Equal Chance .London: Routledge &Kegan Paul,1971. Print.
Demerath, Peter, et al. "Decoding Success: A Middle-Class Logic Of Individual Advancement In A U.S. Suburb And High School." Teachers College Record 112.12 (2010): 2935-2987. ERIC. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.
Hess M, Frederick and Finn E. Chester. Leaving No Child Behind? Options for Kids in Failing Schools New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Print.
Hodge A. Scott. “Census Data Shows Inequality Linked to Education, Not Taxes.” Tax Foundation. Tax Foundation. 16 March. 2012. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.
Huang, Haigen. "Can Students Themselves Narrow The Socioeconomic-Status-Based Achievement Gap Through Their Own Persistence And Learning Time?." Education Policy Analysis Archives 23.108 (2015):3-4 ERIC. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.
Mantsios Gregory. “Class in America-2009.” Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. Boston. Bedford/St.Martin’s.2013.280-295.Print.
“Social Class, Social Changes and Poverty.” ScienceNetLinks. AAAS. n.d. Web. 12 Feb. 2016.
United States. Dept. of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “The Growth of Income Inequality in the United States.” Bureau of Labor Statistics. Dept. of Labor Statistics, Apirl.2015.Web. 10 February 2016.
Waldron Travis. “How Income Inequality Contributes to a Growing Education Gap That is Jeopardizing Our Middle Class.” Think Progress. Think Progress, 12 May. 2012.Web. 11 Feb. 2016.
