Surname 4

Student Name

Course Name

Date

How Socioeconomic Backgrounds Affect Student’s Access to Quality Education and Educational Outcomes

Socioeconomic status (SES) involves the quality of life attributes and privileges and opportunities for society. Barshay argues that despite education being viewed as the greatest equalizer for Americans, academic research and data statistics show a division of education between the rich and the poor (2). In the Obama administration in 2015, the education department reported that funding of poor and wealthy schools had increased by 44% between 2001 and 2012. The money allocated per student in the affluent schools was significantly higher than that of students in the poor school districts. Poverty is not a singular factor, but various psychological and physical stressors characterize it. SES is a reliable and consistent predictor of multiple outcomes in a lifetime, including psychological and physical health. SES influences the overall functioning of people, including their mental and physical health. Low SES correlates to poor educational achievement, poor health, and poverty and ultimately influences society (Morgan, Paul L., et al., 403). Research has shown that kids from poor SES families build academic skills more slowly than kids from households with higher SES. Low SES during childhood has been linked to poor cognitive and language development, socio-emotional and memory processing, and poor health, and low income as they become adults. In communities with low SES, the school systems are typically under-resourced, adversely affecting the student’s academic attainment and outcomes. Increased dropout rates and inadequate education impact the student’s academic attainment, perpetuating low SES in the community. Adjusting school systems and offering early intervention practices decreases some of the risk factors; thus, greater research on the relationship between SES and academic achievement is essential. Sean Reardon, a sociologist, has offered evidence to show that school segregation has shifted from race to income and is getting worse in America. This research argues that students’ access to quality education and educational outcomes such as school attainment, enrolment, performance, and attendance is greatly influenced by students’ family socioeconomic status.

There has been increasing evidence linking low SES with learning disabilities or other adverse psychological results that influence academic attainment. Literacy gaps in kids from varying socioeconomic backgrounds are present before the child starts formal education. Taylor shows that the impact of poverty on student’s educational achievement is significant and begins early (1). The study stipulates that children who grow up in poverty experience challenges in literary and cognitive ability and often begin school socioeconomically and academically behind their counterparts with higher-income backgrounds. Kids from families with low SES are less likely to experience actions that motivate basic reading skills such as oral language, vocabulary, and phonological awareness. Children achieve competency linked to the literacy environment at home, parent distress, and the number of books they own. Poor households lack access to learning experiences and materials such as stimulating toys, computers, books, or tutors that promote a positive literacy environment. Campbell et al. show that the increase in family wealth and income causes a higher dispersion in educational performance fundamentally because those at the lower levels of education distribution have gone further beyond the typical education level (3). People with minor human capital, to begin with, are placed at a more significant disadvantage. The impact increases when the relative economic disadvantage is compounded with racial disadvantage. Kids from poor SES backgrounds start high school with significantly lower literacy skills than high SES families. Pham stipulates that educational disadvantages constitute a significant factor in the student’s educational outcomes where the socioeconomic background makes a difference in student’s academic outcomes. The OECD describes educational disadvantage as the lack of access to quality education and a favourable environment for learning experiences both at home and school. PISA 2015 stipulates that student’s higher socioeconomic background greatly influences positive academic performance. When the parents are more educated, they provide children with a more significant set of learning opportunities at home and engage in discussions and cultural experiences contributing to their reading achievement. Children from higher SES households receive higher expectations for their academic performance, and their parents are intensely interested in their schoolwork which causes positive parental participation. Pham adds that children from highly resourced homes receive additional tuition at home out-of-school environments. Children who are prospective to join college and are from poor SES backgrounds are less likely to gain resources and materials on college compared to their higher-SES peers. Students from poor SES backgrounds are at a greater risk of having huge student loan debts that burdens them and surpasses the national mean (Brown et al., 105).

Research reveals that school conditions greatly influence the SES variances in learning rates more than the family characteristics. Researchers argue that the classroom space plays a vital role in academic outcomes. Learners who are assigned higher-quality classrooms are more likely to perform better, attend college, and save more when they retire. The teachers’ years of experience and training quality are related to the student’s educational achievement. Learners in poor-income schools are not likely to receive highly qualified teachers. Barshay points out that the 25% of the wealthiest school districts uses $1,500 more per learner than 25% of the most poor school districts (2). Funding inequities happen in regards to increased poverty in schools. In 2013, Barshay reported that the schools with high poverty elevated by almost 60% and were getting worse. Communities with low SES have school systems typically under-resourced, which adversely affects the student’s academic attainment and outcomes. The University of Chicago discusses the issue on whether schools eliminate gaps in academic achievement between learners from different races and SES backgrounds (1). The researchers argue that schools cannot eliminate educational inequality before economic inequality is eradicated in society.

The social and economic inequalities outside of school are the only possible factors in closing achievement gaps in schools. However, others argue that schools can support high achievement levels for disadvantaged learners by elevating the quality and quantity of instructions the children get. These actions include increasing access to high-quality preschool, improving teacher’s knowledge and skill, elevating instructional time, and decreasing the class size. However, school reforms and systems have failed to produce schools that educate disadvantaged children to high levels, causing academic achievement gaps. On the contrary, social class differences in academic achievement have increased in the past forty years (University of Chicago, 4). Evidence shows that radical reorganization of school structures and rethinking instructional practices and norms have caused a reduction in the academic achievement gap for elementary children in the south side of Chicago. Elizabeth McGhee, Lisa Rosen, and Stephen Raudenbush argue that school reforms have failed to close the achievement gap because schools have no accountability as organizations. Applying new learning and teaching technique and program require people to purposefully integrate the entire instruction system that offers a coordinated and coherent learning experience.

Taylor revealed that educational inequalities reflect background related to inequality and schools’ characteristics (2). Taylor stipulates that students from under-resourced school districts are left behind when they are being prepared for college (3). Low-income students are ill-prepared for higher education despite the school districts improving the system to produce higher results for low-income learners. The study demonstrates that people must spend on high-quality during early education and offer the necessary support for the K-12 system. Greater rates of child poverty in America create a significant problem for educators where the current system takes children from low SES and gives them less in school. Less is spent on low SES students, and less is expected of them, and sometimes they are assigned the least experienced and least effective teachers. In 2011, the U.S. education department reported that over 40% of low SES schools do not get an equal share of the local and federal funds (Taylor, 5). Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society reported continuing education inequality liked social class and race. The report highlights key issues on the disparities that exist through education policy. Education policy can reduce or increase education inequities and inequalities. Policymakers use narrow and typically insufficient research to develop and implement educational policy, making students from low-income families disadvantaged in attaining quality education. Robson argues that ascribed characteristics such as sex, race, and social class affect people’s outcomes (1). He states that people from upper and middle-class households are highly likely to continue with post-graduate education due to the ascribed characteristics. Robson reported that a child’s SES is one of the most vital indicators of academic outcomes (3). Low SES has been linked with poor grades and has been a significant predictor of skipping or dropping out of school. Research shows that there is an achievement gap in students from poor-income households and others.

Evidence has revealed that schools can support high academic achievement levels among disadvantaged learners by elevating the quality and quantity of instruction offered to students. Education policies can increase the instruction time, elevate access to quality preschool, reduce the class size, and improve the teacher’s skill and knowledge (University of Chicago, 3). Results have shown that national and international interventions can reduce the effects of poverty on children’s achievement when they are sustainable. There is a direct relationship between childhood intervention and greater cognitive and social ability. Policies can reduce the risk factors in children’s environment elevating their potential for educational attainment. Ferguson et al. state that intervention and prevention programs focused on children’s health concern causes positive results for low-income kids and elevate cognitive ability (4). Interventions should be evaluated constantly to ensure they benefit the children and maximize the use of critical components. Children who receive high-quality care and educational setting report higher developmental progress. Intervention programs such as the Chicago Child-Parent Centre program increased academic achievement in mathematics and reading, grade retention, and parental involvement. Intervention programs targets children between preschool and grade three, where no specific curriculum, and the program is is designed to meet each child’s needs. The use of appropriate programs has long-term effects on achievement, including more years of education and higher school completion rates. The negative effect of poverty on educational outcomes can be reduced through intervention studies. When the educational system changes, it maximizes education attainment, such as having shorter summer vacations and longer school days. Ferguson et al. argue that interventions contribute to the readiness of children and help narrow the gaps in educational achievement. The study shows that early achievement gaps didn’t increase despite the increase in the number of low-income families and with other conditions that prevent school readiness. Educational policies adjusted and modelled to control specific factors that influence the children’s readiness and achievements have high promise to eliminate the achievement gaps. Children being offered more books at home continue the positive influence and offering students more resources elevates their achievement. Implementing comprehensive strategies to compensate for low SES disadvantages such as lack of vital resources reduces poverty-related and causes effective learning and teaching. The whole-child approach in education enables the elimination of gaps developed by socioeconomic barriers.

Ultimately, inequalities in quality of life and resource distribution are increasing in the U.S. and worldwide. There is strong evidence that shows the presence of achievement gaps caused by socioeconomic background. Students from high SES perform better than those from low SES, driving the achievement gaps. Research has shown that low SES families build academic skills slower than those from higher SES households. Low SES is linked to high rates of school dropouts and lower chances of joining or completing college. Literacy gaps exist even before children begin formal education, as children from low SES households lack environments that foster fundamental knowledge skills. Children from low SES have limited access to learning resources which limits their overall achievement. Schools in low SES communities receive reduced funding than those in high SES communities, causing a gap in accessing quality education. Sometimes students in SES receive the least trained and effective teachers limiting their achievement. The school systems in low SES groups are usually under-resourced, which adversely affect children’s educational progress and educational outcomes. Despite efforts to improve school systems and intervention programs, they have failed to fill the socioeconomic achievement gaps. There is little evidence that interventions completely eradicate the educational gaps created by SES. All research demonstrates that socioeconomic conditions significantly contribute to educational outcomes where children from low SES communities receive negative outcomes.

Works Cited

Barshay, Jill. “A Decade of Research on the Rich-Poor Divide in Education.” The Hechinger Report, The Hechinger Report, 29 June 2020, https://hechingerreport.org/a-decade-of-research-on-the-rich-poor-divide-in-education/

Brown, Michael Geoffrey, Donghee Y. Wohn, and Nicole Ellison. “Without a map: College access and the online practices of youth from low-income communities.” Computers & Education 92 (2016): 104-116.

Campbell, Mary, et al. “Economic Inequality and Educational Attainment across a Generation.” Focus, vol. 23, ser. 3, 2005, pp. 11–15. 3, www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc233b.pdf

Ferguson, H. Bruce, Sarah Bovaird, and Michael P. Mueller. “The impact of poverty on educational outcomes for children.” Paediatrics & child health 12.8 (2007): 701-706.

Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society, University of California, Berkeley, 2016, Responding to Educational Inequality, belonging.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/haas_institute_race_education_brief_june_20 17_1.pdf.

Morgan, Paul L., et al. “Risk factors for learning-related behavior problems at 24 months of age: Population-based estimates.” Journal of abnormal child psychology 37.3 (2009): 401-413.

Pham, Lien. “How Socioeconomic Background Makes a Difference in Education Outcomes.” EduResearch Matters, Australian Association for Research in Education, 26 Aug. 2019, www.aare.edu.au/blog/?p=4354

Robson, Dr. Karen L. “Structural and Social Inequalities in Schooling.” Sociology of Education in Canada, Pressbooks, 11 Sept. 2019, ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/robsonsoced/chapter/__unknown__-7/.

Taylor, Kelley. “Povert’s Long-Lasting Effects on Student’s Education and Success.” INSIGHT Into Diversity, INSIGHT Into Diversity, 30 May 2017, www.insightintodiversity.com/povertys-long-lasting-effects-on-students-education- and-success/

University of Chicago, 2017, Addressing Educational Inequality, ei.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/documents/UEI2017NewKnowledge- AddressingEducationalInequality.pdf

The post Surname 4 Student Name Course Name Date How Socioeconomic Backgrounds Affect Student’s appeared first on PapersSpot.