Class In Classrooms, Kathy Drobny

In December of 2011, Helen F Ladd, a professor of public policy and economics at Duke University, and Edward B. Fiske, a former education editor, wrote an editorial piece for The New York Times that exposes the elephant in the room regarding policy makers and education. Despite the good intentions of legislators, the authors assert that denial prevails regarding poverty.  The authors believe that policy makers continually ignore the impoverished socioeconomic environments in which many school children live. Legislators do this by believing that schools are capable of offsetting poverty through various programs such as No Child Left Behind and The Occupy Movement, which Ladd and Fiske argue has actually heightened anxiety regarding poverty.

The authors cite a study by Stanford University in which the achievement gap over the last 50 years between high and low income families is reportedly far greater than the gap between Caucasian and African-American students.  Additionally, Ladd and Fiske cite data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which shows that, nationally, greater than 40 % of the variation in reading scores and 46% of the variation in average math scores are linked to the variation in child poverty rates.  When creating programs, policy makers have not addressed students’ challenges that stem from the poverty they carry into the classroom each and every day.  The authors recommend that since the education system cannot eradicate poverty, policy makers should try to provide similar support and experiences to impoverished students as received by their higher socioeconomically advantaged peers.  Examples of such support include afterschool programs, summer camps, mentors, enrichment services, health centers, counseling and food provisions, all of which need improved funding.  I completely agree with the authors of this editorial.  It seems ironic to me that our politicians spend an abundance of time arguing about money when so many individual citizens suffer from not having any money at all.  Rather than argue about cutting funding in one education program in order to create another program in education, consistent support and consistent prevention methods should be of primary focus, particularly when impoverished children have little support outside of school.  Denial may seem easier for some policy makers, but advocacy is far stronger.  Based on Ladd and Fiske’s article, it seems that strong legislators are needed in order to push that elephant out of the room. 

Class Matters. Why Won't We Admit It? The New York Times, December 11, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/opinion/the-unaddressed-link-between-poverty-and-education.html?_r=0