Feelings are subjective self-contained phenomenal experiences. According to the APA Dictionary of Psychology, a feeling
is "a self-contained phenomenal experience"; and feelings are
"subjective, evaluative, and independent of the sensations, thoughts, or
images evoking them". The term feeling is closely related to, but not the same as emotion. "Feeling" may for instance refer to the conscioussubjective experience of emotions. The study of subjective experiences is referred to as phenomenology. The discipline of psychotherapy
generally involves a therapist helping a client understand, articulate
and learn to effectively regulate their own feelings and ultimately take
responsibility for their experience of the world. Feelings are
sometimes held to be characteristic of embodied consciousness.
The English noun feelings may generally refer to any
degree of subjectivity in perception or sensation. However, feelings
often refer to an individual sense of well-being (perhaps of wholeness,
safety or being loved.) Feelings have a semantic field extending from
the individual and spiritual to the social and political. The word feeling
may refer to any of a number of psychological characteristics of
experience, or even to reflect the entire inner life of the individual
(see mood.)
As self-contained phenomenal experiences, evoked by sensations and
perceptions, we might expect feelings to strongly influence the
character of subjective reality; and indeed feelings may sometimes be
seen to harbor bias or to in some way distort veridical perception, in
particular through projection, wishful thinking, among many other such effects.
Feeling may also describe the senses, with an exemplary case being the physical sensation of touch.
History
The modern conception of affect developed in the 19th century with Wilhelm Wundt. The word comes from the German Gefühl, meaning “feeling.”
A number of experiments have been conducted in the study of
social and psychological affective preferences (i.e., what people like
or dislike). Specific research has been done on preferences, attitudes, impression formation, and decision-making. This research contrasts findings with recognition memory (old-new judgments), allowing researchers to demonstrate reliable distinctions between the two. Affect-based judgments and cognitive
processes have been examined with noted differences indicated, and some
argue affect and cognition are under the control of separate and
partially independent systems that can influence each other in a variety
of ways (Zajonc,
1980). Both affect and cognition may constitute independent sources of
effects within systems of information processing. Others suggest emotion
is a result of an anticipated, experienced, or imagined outcome of an
adaptational transaction between organism and environment, therefore
cognitive appraisal processes are keys to the development and expression
of an emotion (Lazarus, 1982).
Emotions (in relation to feelings)
Difference between feelings from emotions
The neuroscientist Antonio Damasio distinguishes between emotions and feelings: Emotions
refer to mental images (i.e. representing either internal or external
states of reality) and the bodily changes accompanying them, whereas feelings
refer to the perception of bodily changes. In other words, emotions
contain a subjective element and a 3rd person observable element,
whereas feelings are subjective and private.
In general, the terms emotion and feelings are used as synonyms
or interchangeable, but actually, they are not. The feeling is a
conscious experience created after the physical sensation or emotional
experience. Whereas emotions are felt through emotional experience. They
are manifested in the unconscious mind and can be associated with
thoughts, desires and actions.
There are two main types of emotion work: evocation and suppression.
Evocation is used to obtain or bring up a certain feeling and
suppression is used to put away or hide certain unwanted feelings.
Emotion work is done by an individual, others upon them, or them upon
others. Emotion work is done to achieve a certain feeling that one
believes one should feel.
Three more specific types of emotion work are cognitive, bodily, and expressive.
Cognitive changes images, bodily changes physical aspects, and
expressive changes gestures. A person who is sad uses expressive emotion
work to lift their spirits by trying to smile. A person who is stressed
may use bodily emotion work by, for example, trying to breathe slower
in order to lower stress levels.
Emotion work allows individuals to change their feelings so that
the emotions suit the current situation (or are deemed appropriate).
Since individuals want to fit in and be seen as normal, they are
constantly working on their feelings in order to fit the situations they
are in.
Social class
Class differences influence and varies how a parent raises their child. Middle-class parents tend to raise their child through the use of feelings and lower-class
parents tend to raise their children through behavior control.
Middle-class parents and lower-class parents raise their children to be
like them feeling and behavioral wise. Middle-class children get
reprimanded for feeling the wrong way and lower-class children are
punished for behaving badly.
Lionel Trilling,
an author and literary critic, described the technique that the middle-
and the lower-class parents use. Under-working and overworking their
children's feelings causes them to seek approval of their feelings in
the future. When children of lower-class and of working-class families join the workforce,
they are less prepared for emotional management than middle-class
children. However, the working-class and the middle-class tend to
complain of over-management or micromanagement of feelings that distract
them from actual work.
Sensation occurs when sense organs collect various stimuli (such as a sound or smell) for transduction, meaning transformation into a form that can be understood by the nervous system.
A gut feeling, or gut reaction, is a visceral emotional reaction to
something. It may be negative, such as a feeling of uneasiness, or
positive, such as a feeling of trust. Gut feelings are generally
regarded as not modulated by conscious thought, but sometimes as a
feature of intuition rather than rationality.
The idea that emotions are experienced in the gut has a long historical
legacy, and many nineteenth-century doctors considered the origins of
mental illness to derive from the intestines.
The phrase "gut feeling" may also be used as a shorthand term for
an individual's "common sense" perception of what is considered "the
right thing to do", such as helping an injured passerby, avoiding dark
alleys and generally acting in accordance with instinctive feelings
about a given situation. It can also refer to simple common knowledge
phrases which are true no matter when said, such as "Water is wet" or
"Fire is hot", or to ideas that an individual intuitively regards as
true (see "truthiness" for examples).
The heart has a collection of ganglia that is called the "intrinsic cardiac nervous system". The feelings of affiliation, love, attachment, anger, hurt are usually
associated with the heart, especially the feeling of love.
A need is something required to sustain a healthy life (e.g. air, water, food).
A (need) deficiency causes a clear adverse outcome: a dysfunction or
death. Abraham H. Maslow, pointed out that satisfying (i.e.,
gratification of) a need, is just as important as deprivation (i.e.,
motivation to satisfy), for it releases the focus of the satisfied need,
to other emergent needs
Motivation is what explains why people or animals initiate, continue
or terminate a certain behavior at a particular time. Motivational
states are commonly understood as forces acting within the agent that
create a disposition to engage in goal-directed behavior. It is often
held that different mental states compete with each other and that only the strongest state determines behavior.
The way that we see other people express their emotions or feelings
determines how we respond. The way an individual responds to a situation
is based on feeling rules.
If an individual is uninformed about a situation the way they respond
would be in a completely different demeanor than if they were informed
about a situation. For example, if a tragic event had occurred and they
had knowledge of it, their response would be sympathetic to that
situation. If they had no knowledge of the situation, then their
response may be indifference. A lack of knowledge or information about
an event can shape the way an individual sees things and the way they
respond.
Timothy D. Wilson,
a psychology professor, tested this theory of the feeling of
uncertainty along with his colleague Yoav Bar-Anan, a social
psychologist. Wilson and Bar-Ann found that the more uncertain or
unclear an individual is about a situation, the more invested they are.
Since an individual does not know the background or the ending of a
story they are constantly replaying an event in their mind which is
causing them to have mixed feelings of happiness, sadness, excitement,
and et cetera. If there is any difference between feelings and
emotions, the feeling of uncertainty is less sure than the emotion of
ambivalence: the former is precarious, the latter is not yet acted upon
or decided upon.
The neurologist Robert Burton, writes in his book On Being Certain,
that feelings of certainty may stem from involuntary mental sensations,
much like emotions or perceptual recognition (another example might be
the tip of the tongue phenomenon).
Individuals in society want to know every detail about something
in hopes to maximize the feeling for that moment, but Wilson found that
feeling uncertain can lead to something being more enjoyable because it
has a sense of mystery. In fact, the feeling of not knowing can lead
them to constantly think and feel about what could have been.
Individuals in society predict that something will give them a
certain desired outcome or feeling. Indulging in what one might have
thought would've made them happy or excited might only cause a temporary
thrill, or it might result in the opposite of what was expected and
wanted. Events and experiences are done and relived to satisfy one's
feelings.
Details and information about the past is used to make decisions, as past experiences of feelings tend to influence current decision-making,
how people will feel in the future, and if they want to feel that way
again. Gilbert and Wilson conducted a study to show how pleased a person
would feel if they purchased flowers for themselves for no specific
reason (birthday, anniversary, or promotion etc.) and how long they
thought that feeling would last. People who had no experience of
purchasing flowers for themselves and those who had experienced buying
flowers for themselves were tested. Results showed that those who had
purchased flowers in the past for themselves felt happier and that
feeling lasted longer for them than for a person who had never
experienced purchasing flowers for themselves.
Arlie Russell Hochschild, a sociologist,
depicted two accounts of emotion. The organismic emotion is the
outburst of emotions and feelings. In organismic emotion,
emotions/feelings are instantly expressed. Social and other factors do
not influence how the emotion is perceived, so these factors have no
control on how or if the emotion is suppressed or expressed.
In interactive emotion, emotions and feelings are controlled. The
individual is constantly considering how to react or what to suppress.
In interactive emotion, unlike in organismic emotion, the individual is
aware of their decision on how they feel and how they show it.
Erving Goffman,
a sociologist and writer, compared how actors withheld their emotions
to the everyday individual. Like actors, individuals can control how
emotions are expressed, but they cannot control their inner emotions or
feelings. Inner feelings can only be suppressed in order to achieve the
expression one wants people to see on the outside. Goffman explains that
emotions and emotional experience are an ongoing thing that an
individual is consciously and actively working through. Individuals want
to conform to society with their inner and outer feelings.
Anger, happiness, joy, stress, and excitement are some of the feelings that can be experienced in life. In response to these emotions, our bodies react as well. For example, nervousness can lead to the sensation of having "knots in the stomach" or "butterflies in the stomach".
Feelings can lead to harm. When an individual is dealing with an
overwhelming amount of stress and problems in their lives, it can lead
to self-harm. When one is in a good state of feeling, they never want it
to end; conversely, when someone is in a bad state, they want that
feeling to disappear. Inflicting harm or pain to oneself is sometimes
the answer for many individuals because they want something to keep
their mind off the real problem. These individuals cut, stab, and starve
themselves in an effort to feel something other than what they
currently feel, as they believe the pain to be not as bad as their
actual problem. Distraction is not the only reason why many individuals
choose to inflict self-harm. Some people inflict self-harm to punish
themselves for feeling a certain way.
Unequal access to education
in the United States results in unequal outcomes for students.
Disparities in academic access among students in the United States are
the result of several factors including: government policies, school choice, family wealth, parenting style, implicit bias towards the race or ethnicity of the student, and the resources available to the student and their school. Educational inequality contributes to a number of broader problems in the United States, including income inequality and increasing prison populations.
Educational inequalities in the United States are wide-ranging, and many
potential solutions have been proposed to mitigate their impacts on
students.
History
Colonial Era
The
earliest forms of education in the U.S. were primarily religiously
motivated. The main purpose of education in the 17th and 18th was to
teach children how to read the bible and abide by Puritan values. These values were espoused by religious white colonists, who would often try to assimilate indigenous children into white puritan standards and convert them to Christianity.
The purpose of formal education for indigenous peoples was to enforce
assimilation/acculturation into European and Christian standards.
Through the process of assimilation, indigenous populations were often
forced to give up several cultural traditions, including their native
language. Forced assimilation would continue past colonial times. In the
early 20th century, indigenous children in certain regions of the U.S.
were forcibly taken from their families and enrolled in boarding schools. The purpose of this was to "civilize" and assimilate indigenous communities into American society.
Historically, African-Americans
in the United States have also had several troubles trying to access
quality education. In colonial times, many white people felt that if
Black people, slaves in particular, were to become educated they would start to challenge the systems of power that kept them oppressed.
Southern states feared slaves would begin to act out against their
slave owners and even escape to Northern states if they were educated.
This caused several states to enact laws that prohibited slaves from
learning to read or write. These were popularly referred to as anti-literacy statutes.
Although punishment varied from state to state, several southern states
(Virginia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia) would criminally
prosecute any slave who attempted to learn to read or write.
In some cases, white people could also be punished for attempting to
educate slaves. Religious groups in certain communities would attempt to
make schools for African-Americans to read or write, but it was often
met with severe opposition from white community members.
Civil War and Reconstruction era
The Civil War
and the emancipation of slaves led to a push for more education of
African-Americans. Most Black people did not have access to education
until the Reconstruction era following the Civil War, when public schools started to become more common.
Newly freed African-Americans prioritized education, and many
considered it an effective way to empower their communities. In Southern
states, Black residents would engage in collective action and
collaborate with the Freedmen's Bureau, northern philanthropic organizations, and other white groups to ensure their access to public education. During the Reconstruction Era the enrollment of Black students began to increase because of the increased population of freed blacks.
Although the enrollment rate of Black students would increase
from that point in time onward, there is still evidence of unequal
achievement between white students and students from non-white racial
identities, as well as between students from low socioeconomic backgrounds and students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds.
Jim Crow era
During the Jim Crow
time, schools were still segregated, which would often result in Black
schools receiving less funding. This meant Black students were educated
in worse facilities, with fewer resources and less well-paid teachers
than their white counterparts. Fewer African-American students would
enroll in school than their white counterparts and they had less public
schools available to them. The majority of Black students would not
continue their education past an elementary school level.
In Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896) it was decided that educational facilities were allowed to
segregate white students from students of color as long as the
educational facilities were considered equal. In practice, separate
educational facilities meant fewer resources and access for Black and
other minority students. On average white students received 17–70
percent more educational expenditures than their Black counterparts. The first Federal legal challenge of these unequal segregated educational systems would occur in California Mendez v. Westminster (1947) followed by Brown v. Board of Education (1954). The decision of Brown v. Board of Education would lead to the desegregation of schools by federal law.
Integration
In the United States, integration is the process of ending race-based segregation within public and private schools, and it is generally referred to in the context of the Civil Rights Movement. Integration has historically been employed as a method for reducing the achievement gap which exists between white and nonwhite students in the United States.
Students in integrated schools also learn to be more accepting of
others. This has been shown to reduce prejudice on the basis of race.
Studies conducted in schools across the country have found that racial integration of schools is effective in reducing the achievement gap. In 1964, in accordance with the Civil Rights Act of that year, the United States Congress commissioned sociologist James Coleman
to direct and conduct a study on school inequality in the U.S. The
report, known colloquially as the Coleman Report, was a landmark study
in the field of sociology and education. The report detailed the extreme
levels of racial segregation in schools which still persisted in the
Southern United States despite the ruling of the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education.
Coleman found that Black students benefited greatly from learning in
mixed-race schools. Therefore, Coleman argued that busing Black students
to white school districts to integrate would be more effective in
reducing the disadvantages of Black students as opposed to an increase
in funding which the report had discovered impacted student achievement
very little. These findings would serve as an influential factor in the creation of the practice known as desegregation busing.
Factors contributing to inequalities
Race
Race is often a big contributor to inequalities in education, and it can explain the widening achievement and discipline gaps between white students and students of color. Implicit bias and stereotyping perpetuate systemic injustices and lead to unequal opportunities.
Race influences teachers' expectations and in turn, influences
achievement results. A 2016 study showed that non-Black teachers had
much lower expectations of Black students than Black teachers who
evaluated the same student. White teachers were 12% less likely to think
the student would graduate from high school and 30% less likely to
think they would graduate from college.
Previous studies have proved the importance of teachers' expectations:
students whose teachers believe they are capable of high achievement
tend to do better (Pygmalion effect).
In another study, it was found that white teachers were more likely to
give constructive feedback on essays if they believed the student who
wrote it was white. Essays perceived to be written by Black or Latino
students were given more praise and less guidance on how to improve
their writing.
One reason for this lack of quality feedback could be that teachers
don't want to appear racist so they grade Black students more easily;
this is actually detrimental and can lead to lower achievement over
time.
One research study done to look at how implicit bias affects
students of color found that white teachers who gave lessons to Black
students had greater anxiety and delivered less clear lectures. They
played recordings of these lectures to non-Blacks students who performed
just as badly, proving that it wasn't a result of the students' ability
but rather implicit bias in the teachers.
Non-Asian minority students often don't have equal access to
high-quality teachers which can be an indication for how well a student
will perform.
However, there has been conflicting research on how large the effect
truly is; some claim having a high-quality teacher is the biggest
predictor of academic success while another study says that inequalities are largely caused by other factors.
19th
Century woodcut depiction of the Southampton Insurrection, led by Nat
Turner. While one history textbook covered the White casualties from the
revolt, it did not cover the much larger number of casualties inflicted
on enslaved Black Americans by Whites afterward.
A range of scholars from at least the late 19th century to the present have produced arguments that white supremacy
exists in U.S. school curriculum, oftentimes to the detriment of
non-White students Americans' learning outcomes and the whole of
American society. In the early 20th century, Historian Carter G. Woodson
argued that U.S. education indoctrinated students into believing White
people were superior, and Black people inferior, by showcasing White
accomplishments and effectively denying that Black people had made any
contributions to society or had any potential. In his experience, the racial message contained in schools' teachings was so strong that he made the claim, "there would be no lynching if it did not start in the schoolroom." More recent scholarship still points to the overrepresentation of perspectives, histories, and accomplishments associated with European and White American culture, and the simultaneous underrepresentation of the perspectives, histories, and accomplishments of non-White Americans'. Swartz (1992) and King (2014) describe school curriculum has been structured by what they call a masternarrative.
Swartz defines this term as an account of reality that advances and
reaffirms White people's dominance in American society through the
centering of White achievements and experiences, while consistently
omitting, simplifying, and "distorting" non-White peoples (p. 341-342).
As an example, Powell and Frankenstein (1997) draw attention to
Eurocentrism in the field of mathematics, arguing that the critical
advancements made in societies outside of Europe, including Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, India, and China, are very frequently ignored in the narrative that the Ancient Greeks pioneered most math, which Europe then later salvaged after the Dark Ages.
In her analysis of American history textbooks, Swartz (1992) highlights
a repeated failure to provide meaningful information about Black
Americans, namely throughout slavery, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and the Civil Rights Movement.
Instead, textbooks often frame slavery and other issues in ways that
encourage sympathy with White Americans, including slave-holders.
Multiple textbooks include discussions of slave revolts in terms of the damage they caused White people instead of focusing on the need of enslaved Black people to overthrow the system of slavery (pp. 346–347).
Other scholars, including Brown (2014), Elson (1964) Huber et al.
(2006), Mills (1994), and Stout (2013) have argued that Black people, Native Americans, East Asian and Southeast Asian Americans, and Mexican Americans have been subject to marginalization, silencing, or misrepresentation in U.S. school curriculum.
Other scholars have argued that White (and also middle-class)
cultural norms are employed in the creation and delivery of school
curriculum, to the detriment of students who do not have the same
cultural background. Crawford (1992) writes that White American values
such as "competition," "confrontation"[12] structure class proceedings
when students with different upbringings may be uncomfortable with or
confused by these conventions. The same is true, she argues, for
activities such as group work and engaging in dialogues with the
teacher, rather than perhaps receiving information silently.
Crawford also asserts that oftentimes schools do not look to conform to
their students' specific life circumstances, thereby obstructing these
students' educational paths (p. 21). Hudley and Mallinson (2012) discuss the use of "standardized English"
in schools and how that impacts students, who speak a wide range of
types of English. "Standardized English" refers to the version of
English used in American academia and professional settings, which is
also the type of English spoken by middle-class White Americans
(pp. 11–12). The authors cite a consensus among linguists that there is
no objective standard for English, and that in reality, standardized
English has been judged to be "standard" because it is what is spoken by
people who wield power in society (p. 12). They emphasize that children
who grow up speaking standardized English enjoy linguistic privilege
when both when learning how to read and write, when interacting with
teachers. At the same time, students who grow up speaking with different
English conventions suffer stigmatization due to their speech patterns
and experience the added difficulty of having to learn a whole new set
of language conventions while participating in "normal" schoolwork
(p. 36). The authors hold that by holding minority students to
historically White English norms, schools often communicate that these
students must make themselves whiter to be seen as acceptable. This is
potentially true for African American Vernacular-speaking students in particular (p. 36).
Effects
Crawford
(1992) and Hudley and Mallinson (2012) state that non-white students
may struggle in school and in life due to their races' and cultures'
marginalization in curriculum.
Other scholars have raised concerns about the lack of opportunities to
see themselves as having academic or professional potential.
These authors assert that lack of meaningful use and discussion of
non-white perspectives, practices, and feats may lead minority students
to feel disillusioned with school, to disengage from learning, and to
doubt their own capabilities. In a study on internalized racism,
Huber et al. (2006) find that curriculum underrepresents minorities and
that this may contribute to engrained senses of racial inferiority
(p. 193).
Citing the issues above, Hudley and Mallinson (2012) and Fryer
(2006) discuss the development of a stigmatizing label of "acting white"
used by some Black and Hispanic students.
According to these authors, the phenomenon of "acting white" comes from
seeing academic success as coming hand in hand with whiteness, or for
some non-white students, the abandonment of their original cultures in
order to succeed in a White-culture-normative society.
In this case, academic success is coupled with accepting the
Eurocentric practices used by schools, which means
self-disenfranchisement. This social stigma of "acting white" may discourage strivings for academic success among Black and Hispanic students. Fryer (2012) explains that Hispanic students' popularity starts to
decline relative to their grade point average after they attain a 2.5;
for Black students, this number is a 3.5; for White students, this
relationship does not appear to occur.
At the societal level, white supremacy in curriculum may
contribute to the perpetuation of white supremacy, affecting future
generations.
Huber et al. (2006) notes that Euro- or white-centric curriculum can
contribute to the normalization of racial inequality and tolerance of
White dominance (p. 193).
Brown and Brown (2010) also state that if schools continue to not teach
about systemic racism, students will grow up to be "apathetic" about
Black victims of mass incarceration and gun-related violence, as well as
the disproportionate suffering experienced by Black Americans after
natural disasters (p. 122).
Socioeconomic status
In the United States, a family's socioeconomic status
(SES) has a significant impact on the child's education. The parents'
level of education, income, and jobs combine to determine the level of
difficulty their children will face in school. It creates an inequality
of learning between children from families of a high SES and children
from families of a low SES. Families with a high SES have the ability to
ensure their child receives a beneficial education while families with a
low SES usually are not able to ensure the same quality education for
their child. This results in children of less wealthy families
performing less well in schools as children of wealthier families. There
are several factors that contribute to this disparity; these factors
narrow into two main subjects: resources and environment.
The type of environment a student lives in is a determinant of
the education they receive. The environment a child is raised in shapes
their perceptions of education. In low SES homes, literacy
is not stressed as much as it is in high SES homes. It is proven that
wealthier parents spend more time talking to their children and this
builds up their vocabulary early on and enhances their literacy skills.
In a study from the NCES, outside school, parental involvement grows
exponentially as the household income grows. It shows that parents
making $100k a year or more were 75% likely to tell a story to their
child where as a family making $20k is only 60% likely to tell their
child a story.
These types of activities are what leads to brain development and kids
with lower SES are statistically receiving less. Children of low SES are
also exposed to a more stressful environment than higher SES children.
They worry about influences a lack of money in the household could
create (such as bills and food). This stress manifests itself all
throughout a students learning career. We see statistically that
students coming from higher poverty areas graduate college at nearly
half the rate of students from a lower poverty school.
There is great variation in the resources available to children
in schools. Families of higher SES are able to invest more into the
education of their children. This ability manifests in the popular
tactic of shopping around school districts:
parents plan where they are going to live based on the quality of the
school district. They can afford to live in areas where other families
of high SES reside, and this congregation of high-SES families produces a
school district that is well funded. These families are capable of
directly investing in their children's education by donating to the
school. Having access to such funds gives the schools capacity to hold
high caliber resources such as high-quality teachers, technology, good
nutrition, clubs, sports, and books. If students have access to such
resources, they are able to learn more effectively. Children of lower
SES families do not have such resources. A timely example shown in the
NCES study is that of home internet access by median income and race. We
see, by a large margin, Black and Hispanic students having the least
access to the internet along with those of the lowest median income
quarter.
These low SES families settle down where there is an availability of
jobs, and are less able to shop around school districts. Clusters of
low-SES families typically are within worse school districts. The
families are not in a position to donate to their children's school and
the schools lack appropriate funding for good resources. This results in
schools that cannot compete with wealthier schools.
Neighborhood effects
Neighborhoods play a significant effect on the development in adolescents
and young adults. As a result, much research has studied how
neighborhoods can explain a person's level of educational attainment.
These findings are highlighted below.
Research has shown that an adolescent's neighborhood can significantly affect his or her life chances.
Children from poorer neighborhoods are less likely to climb out of
poverty compared to children who grow up in more affluent neighborhoods.
In terms of education, students from neighborhoods with a high SES have
higher levels of school readiness and higher IQ
levels. Studies have also shown that there are "links between
neighborhood high SES and educational attainment" in regards to older
adolescents. Children growing up in high SES neighborhoods are more likely to graduate from high school and attend college
compared to students growing up in low SES neighborhoods. Living in a
low SES neighborhood has many implications in terms of education. Among
them are "greater chances of having a child before age 18; lesser
chances of graduating from high school; and earning lower wages as a
young adult. Experiencing more neighborhood poverty as a child is also
associated with a lower rate of college graduation."
The neighborhood effect is mitigated when students who grow up in
low SES neighborhoods move to high SES neighborhoods. These students
are more likely to reap the same benefits as students in high SES
neighborhoods and school systems; their chances of attending college are
much higher than those who stayed in low SES neighborhoods. One study
done in Chicago
placed African Americans students in public housing in the suburbs as
opposed to in the city. The schools in the suburbs generally received
more funding and had mostly white students attending. Students who
attended these schools "were substantially more likely to have the
opportunity to take challenging courses, receive additional academic
help, graduate on time, attend college, and secure good jobs."
Private vs. public education
There are several differences in how private schools operate when compared to public schools.
Public schools are funded by federal, state and local sources with
nearly half of their funding coming from local property taxes.
Private schools are funded from resources outside of the government,
which typically comes from a combination of student tuition, donations,
fundraising, and endowments. Private school enrollment makes up about 10
percent of all K-12 enrollment in the U.S (about 4 million students), while public school enrollment encompasses 56.4 million students.
Because private schools are funded outside of government
channels, they often exercise more freedom in how they operate their
schools. Many private schools choose to teach material outside of the
state-mandated curriculum. They are also allowed to have religious
affiliations and selection criteria for which students they accept. In
contrast, public schools are not allowed to have religious ties and must
accept any student that is geographically zoned in their area. There
have been several arguments that have been raised against private school
systems. Some argue that it perpetuates elitist forms of education, and
has high barriers to entry, as tuition
to private schools can be up to tens of thousands of dollars. For
reference, the national average cost of private school tuition in the
2020–2021 school year is $11,004. Since several private schools have religious affiliations, there have also been arguments regarding potential bias and questionable standards in religious private schools.
Differences in private vs public education can have effects on
the future achievement of children. Several studies point out the fact
that students who attend private schools are more likely to graduate
from high school and attend college afterward.
There have been studies that point to the fact that areas where a
homogenous public education system is present have higher amounts of
inter-generational social mobility. In comparison, private education
systems can lead to higher inequality and less mobility.
The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth has also pointed to the fact
that students who attend private schools tend to earn more in their
careers than compared to their public school counterparts.
Language barriers
As of 2015, there are nearly 5 million English language learner (ELL) students enrolled in U.S. public schools and they are the fastest-growing student population in the U.S.
About 73% of ELL students speak Spanish as their first language,
although the most common language will vary by state. 60% of English
language learner students come from low-income families, where parents
have very limited educational levels. Family income level and lack of
English language skills are often two challenges that are intertwined in
the barriers that ELL students face.
Students who are not proficient in English
are put at a serious disadvantage when compared to their peers. There
is a strong association between English-language ability and the success
of students in school. ELL students have disproportionality high
dropout rates, low graduation rates, and low college completion rates.
A potential cause of ELL student's lack of achievement are
communication difficulties that can arise between student and teacher.
Many educators may treat students with low English proficiency as slow
learners or intellectually disadvantaged.
There is evidence that a potential consequence of this lack of
understanding on the educator's side is the creation of a
self-fulfilling prophecy: teachers treat students as less capable and
students internalize these expectations and underperform.
These students may also feel a cultural conflict between their native
language and English. Cultural differences may cause students to feel a
rejection of their native culture/language leading to a decrease in
motivation in school. Most experts agree that it takes students around
5–7 years to learn academic English, which in a school setting can place
students learning English behind their English-speaking classmates.
Many people who speak little English may face language barriers when
seeking health care. This article describes what is currently known
about language barriers in health care and outlines a research agenda
based on mismatches between the current state of knowledge of language
barriers and what health care stakeholders need to know. in each of
these areas, outline specific research questions and recommendations .
Different people used language in different ways. we capture this by
making language competence-the set of messages and agent can use and
understand-private information. our primary focus is on common-interest
games. Communication generally remains possible; it may be severely
impaired even with common knowledge that language competence is
adequate.
It shows the language barriers may be more important to international
trade then previously though. The language barrier index, a newly
constructed variable that uses detailed linguistic data, is used to show
that language barriers are significantly negatively corelated with
bilateral trade.
Language barrier impedes the formation of interpersonal relationships
and can cause misunderstanding that lead to conflict, frustration,
offense, violence, hurt felling, and wasting time, effort, money as on.
it is also a figurative phrases used primarily to refer to linguistic
barriers to communication, i.e. the difficulties in communication
experienced by people or groups originally speaking different languages,
or even dialects in some cases
Educational inequalities
K-12
Education at the K-12 level is important in setting students up
for future success. However, in the United States there are persisting
inequalities in elementary, junior high, and high school that lead to
many detrimental effects for low-income students of color.
One indicator of inequality is that Black children are more likely to be placed in special education.
Teachers are disproportionately identifying African American students
for developmental disorders: Black students "are about 16% of the
school-age population yet are 26% and 34% of children receiving services
under the SED [serious emotional disturbances] and MMR [mild mental retardation] developmental delay categories." On the other hand, ADHD
in Black children is more likely to go undiagnosed, and as a result,
these students are often punished more severely than white students who
have been recognized as having ADHD.
One study shows that Black students with undiagnosed ADHD are seen as
disruptive and taken out of class, reducing their learning opportunities
and increasing the chances they will end up in prison.
More evidence of inequality is that allocation of resources and
quality of instruction are much worse for African American, Native
American, and Latino students when compared to their white counterparts. An analysis by the Stanford University School of Education
found that there is a high concentration of minority students in
schools that are given fewer resources like books, laboratories, and
computers. In addition, these schools often have larger student to
teacher ratios and instructors with fewer qualifications and less
experience. Teachers who are unqualified and inexperienced are less
likely to adapt to different learning methods and fail to implement
higher-order learning strategies that constitute quality education. Students who are placed in gifted education
often receive better instruction; it was discovered that Black children
were 54% less likely to be placed in one of these programs and "were
three times more likely to be referred for the programs if their teacher
was Black rather than white."
According to multiple studies, African American students are disadvantaged from the very beginning of elementary school.
One survey reported that they have very high aspirations (much higher
when compared to the white students) but usually face negative schooling
experiences that discourage them. These disparities carry over into higher education and explain much of why many choose not to pursue a degree.
Furthermore, in a 2006-07 research performed by the Institute of Education Sciences,
statistics show that Black, Hispanic, poor, and near-poor students made
up 10 percent of the population of total students who attended a public
schools that did not meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).
Higher education
Higher education encompasses undergraduate and postgraduate schooling and usually results in obtaining a higher-paying job.
Not only do Black and Hispanic people have less access to universities,
they face many inequities while they attend and while applying to
postgraduate programs. For most of history, Black Americans were not
admitted into these institutions and were generally dissuaded from
pursuing higher education.
Even though laws have been enacted to make access to higher education
more equal, racial inequalities today continue to prevent completely
equal access.
One study found that the social environment of universities makes
African Americans feel more isolated and less connected to the school.
They observed that "African American students at White institutions have
higher attrition rates, lower grade point averages, lower satisfactory relationships with faculty, lower enrollment into postgraduate programs, and greater dissatisfaction." Additionally, many researchers have studied stereotype threat which is the idea that negative perceptions of race can lead to underperformance.
One of these experiments done at Stanford tested a group of African
Americans and a group of white students with the same measured ability;
African Americans did worse when the test was presented as a measure of
their intellect and matched performance of their white peers when they
were told the test did not reflect intellectual ability.
Other studies have been conducted to analyze the different majors
that students choose and how these majors hold up in the job market.
After analyzing data from 2005 to 2009, they saw that African Americans
were less likely to major in a STEM-related field, which has a higher return on investment than the liberal arts.
A 2018 study yielded similar results: white students are twice as
likely to major in engineering than Black students, with Hispanic
students also being underrepresented.
In regards to postgraduate study, Black students are less likely to be accepted into such programs after college.
One possible reason is because they aren't being recruited for doctoral
programs and are looked upon less favorably if they received a degree
from an HBCU (historically black colleges and universities).
Achievement gap
The achievement gap
describes the inconsistencies in standardized test scores, rates of
high school and college completion, grade point average between
different ethnic-racial groups in the United States. It is significant because White students tend to achieve far more academically compared to Black and Latino students.
Latino and Black students have some of the lowest college school
completion rates in the United States. On average, they also have lower
literacy rates in school and lag behind White students in terms of math
and science proficiency. It is important to understand that these discrepancies have long-term achievement effects on Latino and Black students.
There are several factors that can explain the achievement gap.
Among some of the most studied and popular theories are that
predominantly Black/Latino schools are concentrated in low SES
neighborhoods that do not receive adequate resources to invest in their
student's education (such as the ability to pay for qualified teachers)
and that parental participation in Black and Latino families lags behind
White families.
Family influence is significant as shown in a study that demonstrated
how high levels of parental involvement in low income communities can
actually assist in mitigating the achievement gap.
Summer learning gap
An imbalance in resources at home creates a phenomenon called the summer learning gap.
This exhibits the impact of resources outside of school that influence a
child's education progression. It uncovers a troubling contrast between
the growth in math skills over the summer between children of high SES
and children of low SES.
The graph displaying the summer learning gap shows the higher SES
children starting above the lower SES children at year one. The higher
SES children are already ahead of the lower SES children before grade school
even starts because of the amount of resources available to them at
home. This may be due to their early introduction into literacy and
higher vocabulary due to the higher amount of words they are exposed to
as mention in a previous paragraph. Also, the lower SES children's
access to books is solely through school, and their reading skills are
not developed at all at year one because they have not had the exposure
yet.
As the graph goes on, it is evident that the two groups of
children learn at the same rate only when they are in school. The higher
SES students are still above the lower SES students because the rate of
learning of the children changes radically during the summer. In the
summer, the higher SES children show a very slight increase in learning.
This is due to their access to various resources during the summer
months. Their families are able to enroll them in summer enrichment
activities such as summer camp.
These activities ensures that they are still being educationally
stimulated even when not in school. While at the same time, lower SES
students show evidence of a slight decrease in learning during the
summer months. Lower SES students do not have the same opportunities as
the higher SES students. During the summer, these students are not
focused on learning during the summer. Their parents do not enroll them
in as many summer activities because they cannot afford them and so the
children have more autonomy and freedom in those three months. They are
concerned with having fun, and thus forget some of what they gained
during the school year. This continuing disparity from year to year
results in an approximately 100 point difference in their math scores at
year six.
Discipline gap
The discipline gap refers to the overrepresentation of minority students among the differing rates of school discipline,
especially in comparison to white students. Shifts in disciplinary
policy have been attributed to the discipline gap, with African American
students bearing the brunt of the subsequent inequalities. In recent
decades, disciplinary policies meant to strengthen school control over
social interactions, such as through the use of zero-tolerance, have been implemented, leading to a large increase of sanctions being levied against students.
Studies have also suggested that, for Black students, the likelihood of
suspension increases in concordance with a rise in the population of
Black students in a school's student body, as well as an increased
likelihood of facing harsher punishments for behavior.
Additional research has suggested that African American students are
both differentially disciplined and more likely to face harsher
punishments relative to white students. Furthermore, minority students are more often accused of subjective, rather than objective, disciplinary infractions.
Other minority demographics, such as Latinx and Native American
students, face similar disproportionately high rates of school
discipline—though relative to data about Black students, these findings
have been less consistent.
Explanations for the cause of the discipline gap are
wide-ranging, as both broad factors and individual actions have been
considered as potential sources of the gap. On a macrolevel, things like
school culture have been suggested to be meaningfully associated with
differences in suspension rates.
Conversely, a significant amount of research has been conducted on the
micro-interactions that take place between teachers and students. The self-efficacy and confidence of teachers inherently influence their interactions with students, which can then shape their methods of classroom management and propensity to discipline students. Moreover, preexisting assumptions or biases about students can also influence a teacher's treatment of their students.
Additional issues, such as cultural differences, have been identified
as further complicating the relationship between teachers and students.
Most notably, cultural misunderstandings between white teachers and
Black students have been found to result in disciplinary action taken
disproportionately against Black students. Research has also indicated that the risk of cultural mishaps may be more pronounced among inexperienced or new teachers.
Zero-tolerance policies
Zero-tolerance policies, also known as no-tolerance policies, were originally instituted to prevent school shootings by strictly prohibiting the possession of dangerous weapons in schools.
As these policies have proliferated nationally, research has shown that
schools with large populations of minority students tend to utilize
zero-tolerance more frequently relative to other schools, often in
addition to the use of punitive disciplinary procedures.
Over time, these policies have gradually evolved from their original
purpose and shifted towards meeting school-specific disciplinary goals,
which has inadvertently contributed to the discipline gap.
In many schools, subjective misbehaviors—like disrupting the class or
acting disrespectfully—have become offenses that are addressed by
zero-tolerance.
This has resulted in negative consequences for minority students, as
research has indicated that minorities tend to be disproportionately
disciplined for subjective transgressions.
Additionally, zero-tolerance punishments can lead to student referrals
to the juvenile detention system, even for offenses that may otherwise
be considered minor.
The connection between zero-tolerance and juvenile detention has also
been linked to other elements of the discipline gap, such as
school-based arrests. Despite comprising approximately 15% of students,
African Americans account for 50% of the arrests in schools.
While researchers have attributed many disciplinary policies to this
disparity, zero-tolerance has been noted as a significant contributing
factor.
Exclusionary policies
Exclusionary discipline policies refer to the removal, or 'exclusion,' of students from the classroom—typically in the form of suspensions
or expulsions. The national emphasis on suspensions and other
exclusionary policies has been partially attributed to the rise of
zero-tolerance, as suspensions have become a favored method of punishing
students that are also broadly applied to various infractions.
Even though suspensions are a commonly used form of discipline,
suspension rates for all student demographics—except African
Americans—have declined.
The increase in the rate for African Americans has followed a trend
that was identified in the 1970s, when Black students were estimated to
be twice as likely to receive a suspension, and that has continued to
increase over time.
Studies have also indicated that, particularly among black women,
darker skin tones may raise the risk of receiving a suspension.
In addition to being more likely to receive a suspension, studies have
shown that black students tend to also receive longer suspensions.
As a result of these disparities, research has signaled that students
of color perceive the gap among suspension rates as the result of
intentional discrimination, rather than as efforts to appropriately
enforce school rules.
Exclusion from the classroom has been found to be detrimental to a student's academic performance.
Research has shown that engagement in the classroom is positively
related to student achievement, and, given that suspensions can last for
several days, this can greatly influence the risk of academic
failure—particularly among groups like Black males, who are
disproportionately suspended.
The added impact of suspensions on Black students has been noted as
compounding other issues facing them, such as higher disengagement from
classes, that contribute to the racial achievement gap. Academic performance is further affected by the largely-unsupervised
time spent outside of the classroom, which can bring students in contact
with additional youth who have been suspended or expelled from schools.
Suspensions also stay on a student's school record, which can shape
academic or personal expectations for the student when seen by future
teachers or administrators.
Additional consequences arising from exclusionary policies include
internalization of stigmas, higher risk of dropping out, and the de
facto re-segregation of schools. Exclusion from school typically
coincides with labels of being 'defiant' or 'difficult to deal with'
that students have a high likelihood of internalizing.
Moreover, the services provided during suspensions or at suspension
centers often fail to address this internalization or the stigmas that
result upon returning to school. This can be significant for a student's educational path, as research has revealed that cycles of antisocial behaviors can result from such labels and stigmas. In terms of high school dropouts,
suspensions have been shown to increase the likelihood of dropping out
by a factor of three, in addition to also making students three times
more likely to face future incarceration.
On a macro-level, some researchers have begun to consider the racial
gap among suspension rates as effectively re-segregating schools.
Although the exact causes for the de facto re-segregation of schools
are still being researched, racist attitudes and cultural friction have
been suggested to be potential sources of this issue.
The prison pipeline, also known as the School-to-Prison Pipeline (SPP), refers to the system of student disciplinary referrals to the American juvenile justice system, rather than using disciplinary mechanisms within schools themselves. As a result of this system, negative consequences during adulthood, such as incarceration,
that disproportionately impact minority students have been attributed
to the pipeline, which is closely related to the issue of race in the United States criminal justice system.
Many studies have revealed that during childhood, exposures to the
justice system make students more likely to become imprisoned later in
life.
School disciplinary policies that overly effect Black and minority
students, such as zero-tolerance and exclusionary policies, increase the
risk for students to come into contact with the juvenile justice
system.
These policies disproportionately target students of color, as evidence
has revealed a rise among African American males in the prison system
who were expelled from schools with recently implemented zero-tolerance
policies. Furthermore, suspensions have been identified as making the risk of youth incarceration three times more likely for students. Other factors that have fostered the development of the prison pipeline include law enforcement on school campuses, such as school resource officers,
that play a role in school discipline. Law enforcement officers
intervene or perform arrests to address student issues—like drug use or
assault of teachers or other students—that break the law. However, implicit biases
against minority students have been linked to the disciplinary
recommendations made by school officers, which tend to result in more
severe punishments to be levied against these students.
Though many different factors have gradually led to the creation
of the prison pipeline, one of the clearest indicators of its
development comes from state budgets, as states have generally been
increasing investments in justice system infrastructure while
simultaneously divesting from education.
School-specific factors have also contributed to the development of the
prison pipeline, including the discipline gap and the criminalization
of schools.
A significant number of studies have indicated that exclusionary
discipline can create cycles of bad behaviors that result in
progressively more severe consequences—often ending in involvement with
the justice system.
This has been evidenced by disproportionate arrest rates in schools.
For example, even though they constitute only 15% of students, Black
students comprise 50% of arrests in schools.
Subsequent punishments, especially institutional confinement, can have
inadvertent consequences, such as dropping out of school. Moreover, the bureaucracy of correctional institutions does not correspond well with school systems, as curriculums do not always match.
Consequently, students who reenroll in school tend to not only lack
support systems for reentry, but they must also overcome the deficit
between curriculums.
Research has also indicated that, especially in inner cities, the
various elements of the prison pipeline are ultimately counterproductive
to improving or 'fixing' a student's education and disciplinary track
record.
Other Policies
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
The No Child Left Behind Act
(NCLB) was a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965. Signed in 2001 by President Bush, the law aimed to create a
more inclusive, responsive, and fair education system by ensuring that
there is accountability, flexibility, and increased federal support for
schools.
Some of the criticisms NCLB received include the heavy reliance
on standardized test scores as well as harsh penalties for schools whose
students were not on track to reach proficiency on said tests.
Every Student Succeeds Act
On December 10, 2015, the NCLB Act came to and end and was replaced the by the Every Student Succeeds Act
(ESSA), eliminating some of the controversial provisions of NCLB. Under
the new law, the federal government continues to provide a broad
framework for schools. However, the responsibility of holding schools
accountable shifts back to the states. Each state must set flexible
goals for its schools and evaluate them accordingly.
Under the new law, states must still test students once a year in
certain areas such as math and reading. However, state aren't limited
to using their own tests, while concomitantly encouraging them to get
rid of unnecessary testing.
In 2019, Collaborative for Student Success, an educational
advocacy organization that focuses on defending efforts on advancing
policies that support the development of strong systems and practices to
ensure that all kids are prepared to achieve their potential and
professional goals held an ESSA Anniversary Summit on Capitol Hill in Washington D.C. At the summit, Becky Pringle, Vice President of the National Education Association
(NEA), pointed out that despite "the many successes and new
opportunities [ESSA brought]...some states [hadn't] had the capacity to
take advantage of the innovations built into the law."
Potential solutions
Early intervention
Research studies have shown that early intervention
may have drastic effects on future growth and development in children,
as well as improve their well-being and reduce the demand for social
services over their life.
Early intervention can include a wide array of educational activities,
including an increased emphasis on reading and writing, providing
additional tools or resources for learning, as well as supplements to
aid special education students.
Perry Preschool Project
The Perry Preschool Project
in Ypsilanti, Michigan reaffirmed the positive relationship between
early education and future achievement. The study assigned random 3- and
4-year-old children from low-income families to attend the Perry
school, which had ample resources and a high teacher to student ratio.
It also heavily emphasized the development of reading and writing
skills. Once graduated, students who attended the Perry school were less
than 1/5 as likely to have broken the law as compared with students who
did not attend the preschool. The study also discovered that those who
attended the preschool program earned, on average, $5,500 more per year
than those who did not attend the school, pointing to a higher return on
investment for the students who attended the Perry school. This study
received widespread acclaim and validated the idea that early
intervention is a powerful tool in alleviating educational and income
inequality in America.
Abecedarian Early Intervention Project
The Abecedarian Project
in North Carolina is another study that found early intervention in
education produced significant gains for future attainment. The study
provided a group of infants from low-income families with early
childhood education programs five days a week, eight hours each day. The
educational programs emphasized language, and incorporated education
into game activities.
This program continued for 5 years. The group's future progress was
then measured as they grew older, and compared to a control group that
contained students in a similar socioeconomic status that did not
receive early intervention. Children who received early education were
more likely to attend college, graduate high school, and reported having
higher salaries. They were also less likely to engage in criminal
activities, and more likely to have consistent employment. This study was also highly influential in supporting the positive effect of early intervention initiatives.
General effects of early intervention
There
is also more evidence that points to the beneficial effects of early
intervention programs. It has been found that children who attend
education centers or participate in early childhood education programs
on average perform better on initial math and reading assessments than
children who did not participate in these initiatives. This gap
continues through the early years of children's schooling and is more
prominent among groups of students who come from disadvantaged
backgrounds.
Most social studies conducted regarding intervention programs find that
inequality in early education leads to inequality in future ability,
achievement, and adult success.
Neurological studies have also found that negative psychosocial risks
in early childhood affect the developing brain and a child's
development. These studies concluded that reducing the effects of these
negative risks and subsequent inequality requires targeted interventions
to address specific risk factors, like education.
Parental involvement and engagement
Parental
involvement is when schools give advice to parents on what they can do
to help their children while parental engagement is when schools listen
to parents on how better they can teach their students; parental
involvement has been shown to work well but engagement works even
better.
Researchers have found that high-achieving African American students
are more likely to have parents who tutor them at home, provide
additional practice problems, and keep in touch with school personnel.
There is evidence that African American parents do value
education for their child, but may not be as involved in schools because
they face hostility from teachers when they give their input.
Lack of involvement can also be due to social class and socioeconomic
status: working-class African American parents tend to have less access
to "human, financial, social, and cultural resources."
Working-class African American parents also tend to be more
confrontational toward school personnel compared to the middle-class
African American parents who usually have the ability to choose what
school and what class their child is enrolled in.
Surveys conducted on parental involvement in low-income families
showed that more than 97% of the parents said they wanted to help their
children at home and wanted to work with the teachers. However, they
were more likely to agree with the statements "I have little to do with
my children's success in school," "Working parents do not have time to
be involved in school activities," and "I do not have enough training to
help make school decisions."
A case study of Clark Elementary in the Pacific Northwest showed that
teachers involved parents more after understanding the challenges that
the parents faced, such as being a non-native English speaker or being
unemployed.
School funding
School funding
and/or quality has been shown to account for as much of a 40% variance
in student achievement. While school funding can be seen as a factor
that perpetuates educational inequality, it also has the ability to
assist in mitigating it.
The funding gap is a term often used to explain the differences
in resource allocation between high-income and low-income schools.
Many studies have found that states are spending less money on students
from low-income communities than they are on students from high-income
communities (Growing Gaps figure). A 2015 study found that across the
United States, school districts with high levels of poverty are likely
to receive 10 percent less per student (in resources provided from the
state and local government) compared to more affluent school districts.
For students of color this funding gap is more pervasive; school
districts where students of color are in the majority have been shown to
receive 15 percent less per student compared to school districts that
are mostly white.
The funding gap has many implications for those students whose school districts are receiving less aid from the state and local government
(in comparison to less impoverished districts). For students in the
former districts, this funding gap has led to poorer teacher quality
which has been shown to lead to low levels of educational attainment
among poor and minority students. The Learning Policy Institute in 2018 has concluded from a longitudinal study
that "a 21.7% increase in per-pupil spending throughout all 12
school-age years was enough to eliminate the education attainment gap
between children from low-income and non-poor families and to raise
graduation rates for low-income children by 20 percentage points."
A charter school is an independent learning institution most commonly serving secondary students. It receives public funding through a charter granted to a state or local agency.
Charter schools have been depicted as a controversial solution to
alleviate educational inequality in the United States. In an effort to
combat the impacts of living in a low-income school district,
charter schools have emerged as a means of reorganizing funding to
better assist low-income students and their communities. This method is
designed to decrease the negative effects on students' educational
quality as a result of living in a low-tax-base community.
Critics of charter schools argue they de-emphasize the
significance of public education and are subject to greedy enterprise
exploiting the fundamental right of education for the sole purpose of
profiting. While charter schools are technically considered "public
schools," opponents argue that their operational differences implicitly
create differences in quality and type of public education, as standards
and operating procedures are individualized based on each school.
Another criticism of charter schools is the possible negative effects
they may have on students who are racial minorities or come from
low-income backgrounds. Studies have also found charter schools to be much more segregated than their public school counterparts. Free-market
proponents often support charter schools, arguing they are more
effective than typical public schools, specifically in reference to
low-income students. Other supporters of charter schools argue that they
revive participation in public education, expand existing boundaries
regarding teaching methods, and encourage a more community-based
approach towards education.
However, studies have not found conclusive evidence that charter
schools as a whole are more effective than traditional public schools.
One common model of charter schools is called a "no excuses"
school. This label has been adopted by many charter schools as a means
of indicating their dedication to a rigorous and immersive educational
experience. While there is no official list of features required to be a
"no-excuse" charter, they have many common characteristics. Some of
these attributes include high behavioral expectations, strict
disciplinary codes, college preparatory curriculum, and initiatives to
hire and retain quality teachers.
School discipline reform
Though
educational and disciplinary inequalities are very complex and
multi-faceted, there have been many proposals aimed at reducing
disparities. Some researchers have suggested that focusing on improving
the relationships between students and teachers, as well as the overall
culture in schools, can both better support minority students and
provide a base from which other reforms can be implemented and
developed.
Research has shown that when teachers are viewed as engaging or
involved in a student's success, African American students are more
likely to accept them.
Engaging teaching styles not only better connect with Black
students—who often face more barriers to success—but also lead to
improved classroom management that results in fewer behavioral
conflicts, which may have otherwise required disciplinary intervention.
Suggestions for improving teaching styles have included various
additions to teacher training, such as accounting for challenges that
students may face outside of school and contextualizing the actions of
students.
Other proposed additions have included implicit bias training and
bringing attention to the cultural differences that may exist between a
teacher and their students.
Even though research about how to reduce the discipline gap is still
ongoing, acknowledging the risk of bias when disciplining students has
been noted as a potential method of limiting the growth of the gap.
Other approaches related to reducing the discipline gap have
focused on disciplinary practices themselves. On a broad level, it has
been suggested that school discipline should be centered around
empathetic accountability systems, rather than on largely punitive
consequences.
Supporters of this view emphasize that research has shown that
perceptions of a school's disciplinary climate can have negative
consequences, such as apathy towards rules and school in general. One method of implementing this shift is through the use of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), which focuses on building relationships and proactively discussing rules and codes of conduct with students. Although this method has been extensively researched and promoted, critics have noted that it can be expensive to implement. Advocates for school discipline reform have also expressed interest in applying restorative justice practices to school disciplinary procedures.
Restorative justice in schools utilizes conflict mediation to address
disciplinary infractions in the hopes of building stronger relationships
between the involved parties; however, researchers have indicated that
the efficacy of restorative programs is still being determined.
Additional approaches to reform have focused on mitigating some of the
negative consequences of zero-tolerance policies. As some scholars have
noted, zero-tolerance can often overlook the needs or lack of support
that students may face, in addition to creating a restrictive learning
environment.
Specific efforts to reduce the impacts of zero-tolerance include
expanding the options for disciplining students and moving away from the
use of exclusionary policies, such as suspensions or expulsions.
As with other proposals for reform, scholars have noted that additional
research is needed to fully develop these efforts and close the
discipline gap.
Furthermore, community involvement has also been suggested to address
discrepancies among disciplinary policies. Bringing families and school
officials together has been identified as a potential way to improve
advocacy for minority students, as criticism against policies that
disproportionately affect certain groups can be more directly raised.
This approach has had some anecdotal success, such as in some
communities in California where community advocacy involving youth,
school officials, and family members succeeded in addressing
disciplinary problems related to suspensions.
Given that the discipline gap disproportionately moves Black and
minority students into the prison pipeline, school discipline reform has
also focused on reducing the factors that contribute to the pipeline.
Advocates note that shifting away from bias and policies that contribute
to the pipeline, such as punitive discipline, also entails broader
considerations of how the pipeline manifests and costs society.
Suspensions and other precursors to the pipeline not only potentially
lead to future incarceration, but also to societal expenses that range
from costs associated with crime to forfeited sources of tax revenue.
Other reforms related to breaking the pipeline include addressing
transitional issues between correctional facilities and schools, as
transitions often fail to effectively transfer students without a loss
of school time. Ensuring better transitions has been identified as a potential area that can be addressed by legislation and policymakers.
Additionally, reform efforts also include raising awareness of how
juvenile justice system referrals or other disciplinary punishments can
lead to severe consequences later in life for students, especially since
school staff and resource officers have a degree of discretion when
issuing punishments.
_01.jpg)
.jpg)
