Week 14, November 28th
A New Educational Policy Paradigm
The reading this week was entitled “What “Counts” as Educational Policy? Notes Towards a New Paradigm” by Jean Anyon. Anyon mentions early on in the article that there is “still no large urban district that can demonstrate high achievement in even half of its students or schools” (66) despite many decades worth of educational policy that have been pushed through to improve the academic success in urban schools. She argues that there are a few fundamental reasons why educational policies have failed urban schools over the years, the main reason being that none of these policies have addressed the issue of poverty that many families in urban districts experience. She says, “Individual and neighborhood poverty builds walls around schools and classrooms that education policy does not penetrate or scale” (79). Rather than focusing on the successes and failures of educational policies over the years, Anyon addresses federal and state economic policies that prevent urban districts from achieving high rates of academic success.
Examples of federal or state mandates that hinder low-income families are the minimum wage, too few jobs and the locations of available jobs, tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations, the wage disparity between men and women, and the disallowance of unionized workers.These policies hinder the upward mobility of people living in poverty, most of whom reside in urban areas, and lead to insufficient funding for schools in these areas. Anyon states that “even when urban school reform succeeds, it fails--when there are no decent jobs a diploma from a successfully reformed school or district will attract, and there is no government or familial funding sufficient for the vast majority of low-income graduates of even good urban high schools to obtain a bachelor's degree” (70). Anyon discusses the fact that many of these economic hardships affect Blacks and Latinos especially, as 50% of these families earn less than 200% of the poverty level.
Living in poverty is a detriment to children’s cognitive development, a fact which provides another reason why educational policies that do not address economic issues fail. The best, most engaging lessons or experiences will still fail if students’ basic needs of food, housing, and safety are not met. Children living in poverty are emotionally and physically stressed and have more health and behavior difficulties. In addition, “the least advantaged United States children begin their formal schooling in consistently lower-quality schools. This reinforces the inequalities that develop even before children reach school age” (76).
Anyon supports her argument with research from several mobility programs designed to move families out of impoverished areas. I found the study on the Gautreaux program in Chicago interesting, where Chicago Housing Authority was ordered to desegregate areas of the city and suburbs. Over 7,000 families moved to higher-income areas and children of these families were found to be “significantly more likely than their urban counterparts to be in college-bound tracks, in four-year colleges, and were subsequently more likely to be employed in jobs with higher pay and with benefits than children who stayed in the city” (80).
To conclude her article, Anyon suggests a “new educational policy paradigm” that “removes the economic barriers to school quality and consequence” (83). She pushes for a higher minimum wage, job creation in cities that offer chances for career growth, and the enforcement of antidiscrimination policies. (She also mentions taxing wealthy families and corporations to help pay for these initiatives. I’m interested to hear what everyone thinks of this idea- I’ve often heard the argument that higher taxes on corporations will lead to major businesses leaving the area to move to places with lower taxes or out of the country, leading to fewer available jobs.) These adjustments to economic policy are ultimately what will create quality and equity in urban districts and schools.
The reading this week was entitled “What “Counts” as Educational Policy? Notes Towards a New Paradigm” by Jean Anyon. Anyon mentions early on in the article that there is “still no large urban district that can demonstrate high achievement in even half of its students or schools” (66) despite many decades worth of educational policy that have been pushed through to improve the academic success in urban schools. She argues that there are a few fundamental reasons why educational policies have failed urban schools over the years, the main reason being that none of these policies have addressed the issue of poverty that many families in urban districts experience. She says, “Individual and neighborhood poverty builds walls around schools and classrooms that education policy does not penetrate or scale” (79). Rather than focusing on the successes and failures of educational policies over the years, Anyon addresses federal and state economic policies that prevent urban districts from achieving high rates of academic success.
Examples of federal or state mandates that hinder low-income families are the minimum wage, too few jobs and the locations of available jobs, tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations, the wage disparity between men and women, and the disallowance of unionized workers.These policies hinder the upward mobility of people living in poverty, most of whom reside in urban areas, and lead to insufficient funding for schools in these areas. Anyon states that “even when urban school reform succeeds, it fails--when there are no decent jobs a diploma from a successfully reformed school or district will attract, and there is no government or familial funding sufficient for the vast majority of low-income graduates of even good urban high schools to obtain a bachelor's degree” (70). Anyon discusses the fact that many of these economic hardships affect Blacks and Latinos especially, as 50% of these families earn less than 200% of the poverty level.
Living in poverty is a detriment to children’s cognitive development, a fact which provides another reason why educational policies that do not address economic issues fail. The best, most engaging lessons or experiences will still fail if students’ basic needs of food, housing, and safety are not met. Children living in poverty are emotionally and physically stressed and have more health and behavior difficulties. In addition, “the least advantaged United States children begin their formal schooling in consistently lower-quality schools. This reinforces the inequalities that develop even before children reach school age” (76).
Anyon supports her argument with research from several mobility programs designed to move families out of impoverished areas. I found the study on the Gautreaux program in Chicago interesting, where Chicago Housing Authority was ordered to desegregate areas of the city and suburbs. Over 7,000 families moved to higher-income areas and children of these families were found to be “significantly more likely than their urban counterparts to be in college-bound tracks, in four-year colleges, and were subsequently more likely to be employed in jobs with higher pay and with benefits than children who stayed in the city” (80).
To conclude her article, Anyon suggests a “new educational policy paradigm” that “removes the economic barriers to school quality and consequence” (83). She pushes for a higher minimum wage, job creation in cities that offer chances for career growth, and the enforcement of antidiscrimination policies. (She also mentions taxing wealthy families and corporations to help pay for these initiatives. I’m interested to hear what everyone thinks of this idea- I’ve often heard the argument that higher taxes on corporations will lead to major businesses leaving the area to move to places with lower taxes or out of the country, leading to fewer available jobs.) These adjustments to economic policy are ultimately what will create quality and equity in urban districts and schools.
“Individual and neighborhood poverty builds walls around schools and classrooms that education policy does not penetrate or scale” - I think that this quote is important - and I enjoyed the facts in the video you posted, and it gave some helpful supports that schools and teachers can do. But that wall is still there! Like you said in your last paragraph, we need to get the ENTIRE community to help support all of our students, they shouldn't be "walled" off!
ReplyDeleteI found this article about taxes and corporations that was pretty interesting: https://qz.com/1144201/under-trump-us-jobs-are-moving-overseas-even-faster-than-before/ .
ReplyDeleteIt looks like even with lower taxes corporations are still leaving. As it says, "To actually protect good jobs in the United States, major fixes are needed to US trade and tax laws that make it profitable for companies to shift production and earnings overseas, as well as more investment in training workers for jobs that add more value.". So it looks like the issues here are similar to what schools and urban areas face: solutions that look good on the surface are not really effective at attacking the roots of our problems. The impact that tax laws have on our society is helping to keep the rich rich and the poor poor, and we see that reflected in our schools.
"The best, most engaging lessons or experiences will still fail if students’ basic needs of food, housing, and safety are not met." When this is a known issue for children of poverty, there needs to be support. The theme of community comes up a lot in our readings and discussions. To be a well running community support is crucial, policy markers need to care for all communities.
ReplyDeleteFor initiatives you mentioned at the end of your post, I feel like these major businesses can afford to pay higher taxes. There is a risk for them but you would think those risks shouldn't matter if this is what can help eliminate poverty issues. I might need to look into Ally's article she posted above.