The Relationship Between Education and Poverty

Since the early 20^th century, schooling in the United States has been compulsory, yet in public education, money has always been an issue. Just consider the modern day, when Trump wants dramatic cuts to children's programs. These cuts would take funds away from those

underprivileged students who need it the most. The early days of education also saw a serious inequality in funding between black and white schools, which President Lyndon B. Johnson attempted to remedy through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

In “The Only Valid Passport From Poverty”, Dana Goldstein writes about how the “ESEA was all about ‘compensatory education’ for the 19 percent of low-income public school students falling behind in poor, largely black and Hispanic schools” (114).  This policy was helpful in integrating schools, and led to student improvement where it was successfully implemented. However, with the closing of schools, black teachers were disproportionately laid off. This racially motivated trend proved to be detrimental to schools. Many white teachers assumed that new black students would be far behind their white peers, yet it turned out that these children had been receiving a higher level of education than the white teachers could offer. Although the achievement gap was frequently attributed to race, “many teachers lacked relevant experience or training in working with poor students of any race” (121).  Better teaching appeared to be the best way to keep at-risk students in school, lest they drop out and face lives unemployment or crime.

Yet, as Jean Anyon outlines in her article “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work”, lower-income students are usually not the ones that receive what many would consider a high-quality education. In this article, she describes the differences in curriculum and pedagogy in four types of schools. What is most startling is how vastly different the schooling experience is for these children.  In working-class schools, students are treated as almost robotic, being prepared for jobs that require repetitive procedures and very little thought. One quote that stuck out to me comes from a science teacher describing an assignment, who says, “It tells them exactly what to do, or they couldn’t do it” (75). The students have a clear procedure to follow with no room for deviation. This is frightening in that it shows how little faith these teachers have in their students’ abilities to think or figure something out. The teachers are setting their students up for one type of life, and not giving them any tools to perhaps make something else of themselves. It is a clear example of how, if we are to change the way society works on such a hierarchy, we need to start with the public schools.

As I learned more about the classrooms that Anyon observed, it became very obvious that the higher the social class, the more positive the students’ schooling experience.  In the affluent professional school, the science teacher described an experiment as giving “…a hands-on experience—so they can make sense of it. It doesn’t matter whether it…is right or wrong. I bring them together and there’s value in discussing their ideas” (82). In this case, students are given agency over their work, and interact with their ideas on a personal level. They are able to be creative and pursue their interests in a cooperative environment. It seems like a much better place to be a student.

The conclusion of Anyon’s research shows that such differences in schools perpetuate “the unequal structure of economic relationships in which we work and live” (90). In the modern day, despite the ESEA, we see issues in funding that tend to lead low-income students to lower levels of success.  The following article shows that budget cuts have an immense impact on student success: This is what inadequate funding looks and feels like--as told by an entire faculty. It compounds Dana Goldstein’s ideas that “effective teaching is intimately related to how well a teacher knows who his charges are and the nature of their surroundings” (Passport 128). These teachers, with the experience and knowledge of their community, are ultimately more successful at preparing students for the types of lives they want to lead, not what society simply expects of them. When teachers have the knowledge and means to connect with their students, education becomes a treat and not just a requirement.