This researched argument explores whether the New Zealand Ministry of Education’s (MOE) decile system is detrimental for students of lower decile schools in achieving academic success. The intention of the decile funding system is the help enable lower socio-economic schools “…overcome any barriers to learning…” (Ministry of Education, 2016) by providing the appropriate level of funding. In theory, the lower the school’s decile rating, the more funding that school should receive to educate the students. Narrowing the focus of funding to the physical schools and not the communities themselves, the MOE is arguably not helping the student to overcome any fundamental barriers to learning, because the barriers are mainly embedded in the communities …show more content…
In the early 2000s, the MOE instituted the decile system. The purpose of the decile system was to reallocate funding appropriately across the wide demographic spectrum of New Zealand’s society. Every five years the decile system is recalculated by the information gathered from the New Zealand census. Then, by taking into account the following five key socio-economic factors of the student’s …show more content…
By labelling the schools from decile 1 through to decile 10 as it is seen today, instils a belief that your child will not get as good of an education in a lower decile school then you would at a higher decile school. This way of prejudiced thinking has developed into something that is colloquially known as ‘white flight’ or ‘geographic fallacy’. White flight, or geographical fallacy, is where families with enough wealth intentionally move their child into a higher decile school mesh block. This consequently enhances one community at the cost of another community. Because of this manipulation of the communities due to misconceptions of the decile ratings, the wealth is becoming even more concentrated around higher decile schools. This leaves even less wealth for the lower decile schools (Education and Science Committee of the 46th Parliament, 2003). Additionally, Gordon (2015) makes the observation that lower decile schools have seen their roles getting smaller over the last decade, whereas the higher decile schools are becoming larger due to the exodus of wealthier families. This exodus only serves to obscure the lower decile schools’ mesh blocks. The fewer students that attend a particular school, the less funding
Savage Inequalities, written by Jonathan Kozol, shows his two-year investigation into the neighborhoods and schools of the privileged and disadvantaged. Kozol shows disparities in educational expenditures between suburban and urban schools. He also shows how this matter affects children that have few or no books at all and are located in bad neighborhoods. You can draw conclusions about the urban schools in comparison to the suburban ones and it would be completely correct. The differences between a quality education and different races are analyzed. Kozol even goes as far as suggesting that suburban schools have better use for their money because the children's futures are more secure in a suburban setting. He thinks that each child should receive as much as they need in order to be equal with everyone else. If children in Detroit have greater needs than a student in Ann Arbor, then the students in Detroit should receive a greater amount of money.
The fourth chapter in Putnam’s Our Kids is titled “Schooling”, and it focuses on how education plays into class inequality. The argument is that while schools do not cause the opportunity gap between poor kids and rich kids, but the schools allow it to grow. Putnam claims, “schools as sites probably widen the class gap,” (182). How the schools act as these sites, is based strongly on the physical segregation of rich people from poor people. Putnam refers to this segregation as “residential sorting”, and states that, “residential sorting by income [...] has shunted high-income and low-income students into separate schools,” (163). Rich parents want their kids in the best schools, with the best teachers and the best peers, and are able to afford
The article notes that these are the inequalities of the title, seen in the way schools in predominantly white neighborhoods are more likely to have sufficient funding, while schools in poor and minority neighborhoods do not. Kozol shows everyone involved in the education system that public schools are still separate and, therefore, still unequal. Suburban schools, which are primarily made up of white students, are given a far better education than urban schools. These urban schools are primarily made up of Hispanics and African Americans. The second is the concern over segregation and the effect it has on society.
In the United States, a form of Meritocracy is employed. This system recognizes and corrects the socioeconomic disadvantages (Arora). While efforts have been made to correct the problem, many still fall flat. Many schools, for example, are not equal and some are even getting worse. Lee County School District, a district that boasted no 'F' and 'D' level schools in 2010, now have three failing schools and eight 'D' levels. The number of 'A' level schools have also fallen from 60 in 2011 to 36 in 2013 (LCPS).
In "Still Separate, Still Unequal: America's Educational Apartheid," Jonathan Kozol addresses the deafening issues that urban public schools in America remain segregated, underserved, and their respective state unrecognized. Kozol was apprised of the tragedy via the study of unconscionable statistics on the actuality of non-diverse schools. He determined that an inordinate number of elementary schools continue to be segregated by race; regardless of the complexion of the area in which they reside. Numerous studies identify that many blacks are still living in poverty or in lower income neighborhoods. Consequently, the location of schools has a profound effect on the quality of the student’s education. Funding is directly affected by the affluency
Schools in all regions differ from one another, from lack of resources to the level of education being received “You swim like a public school boy” (Arvanitakis 2009). Education opportunities are provided to schools from certain areas and status in society, and those who are privileged and wealthy tend to go the best schooling and receive the best education due to their parents or families wealth. This determines where the child would receive schooling and what type. The wealthier Australians use their wealth to their advantage and know they have the power to choose whatever school they desire. “If your parents could afford to send you to a private school – which are much better funded than poorer public schools – chances are that you would have access to better resources than at a public school” (Arvanitakis 2009). Status and schooling can determine your outcome and status in society and without wealth, you can be deprived of proper
Through programs that directly fuel desegregation in schools, our educational systems have become a melting pot of different races, languages, economic status and abilities. Programs have been in place for the past fifty years to bring student that live in school districts that lack quality educational choices, to schools that are capable of providing quality education to all who attend. Typically the trend appears to show that the schools of higher quality are located in suburban areas, leaving children who live in “black” inner-city areas to abandon the failing school systems of their neighborhoods for transportation to these suburban, “white” schools. (Angrist & Lang, 2004)
With this many students, both state and federal representatives have made efforts to adopt reforms designed to make a solution to the funding inequality. The disproportion of funds first and foremost effects the amount of programs offered to children that vary from basic subjects such as: English, Math, and Science. This created the motivation to improve the quality of education for low-income neighborhoods by targeting resources other than property taxes and redirecting the states budgets. The goal the school districts all shared was the need to increase instruction, add after school activities, promote a well-rounded education, physical innovations to facilities and classrooms, and to update the academic resources. The popular demand that the funding to public education needs to correspond throughout all the school districts. Wealthy tax payers often argue that a region that depends on property taxes is the “American way.” This argument derives from the ideology that American success relies on perseverance and hard work, but if the playing field is uneven the higher born student has an advantage. “High property taxes—the burdens and perverse incentives they create, the rage they generate, the town-to-town school funding inequities they proliferate—…represent an endless New England nightmare…” (Peirce and Johnson, 2006). In the attempt to
Poorer schools with more diverse populations have poor educational programs. Teachers methodically drone out outdated curriculum on timetables set by standards set by the state. Students are not engaged or encouraged to be creative thinkers. They are often not even given handouts or physical elements of education to touch or feel or engage them into really connecting to the material being presented by the teacher in front of them. Time is not wasted exploring any of the subjects in a meaningful way. As much of the curriculum is gone through as the teacher can get through given the restriction of having a classroom of students that are not picking it up adequately enough according to standardized tests scores. So time is spent re-droning the material to them and re-testing before the cycle repeats in this classroom and other subject classrooms in these types of school. This education is free. As John Gatto writes about in his book, “Against School”, it seems as if the vast majority of students are being taught be blue collared, low paid but obedient citizens. As she makes her way up to less diverse, more likely private and expensive schools, the education becomes better. Students are engaged by teachers that seem to like to teach. Students are encouraged to be
Inequalities in Education Funding inequalities have been an issue from past to present, especially in the low-income communities. In fact, students in urban areas with less funding have low attendance, score lower on standardized testing, and a low graduation rate. Also subjected to outdated textbooks, old dilapidated buildings, students in the inner cities need to compete with their suburban and wealthy counterparts for this reason funding inequalities must end and more money should be directed to these communities from federal, state, and local governments. Frank Johnson, a writer for the National Center for Education Statistics, “Disparities in Public School Spending.”
School funding is systemically unequal, partially because the majority of school funding comes from the school district’s local property taxes, positioning the poorest communities at the bottom rung of the education playing field. A student’s socioeconomic status often defines her success in a classroom for a number of reasons. Students who live below the poverty line have less motivation to succeed, and their parents are less inclined to participate in their child’s education, often because the parents cannot provide support for their children. Although it’s logical that school districts from poorer communities cannot collect as much funding as the richer communities, persons stuck in these low-income communities often pay higher taxes, and still their school dis...
According to Byman and Kansanen (2008, p605) ‘… teaching in itself does not imply learning’. The underachievement of young people in education has been a priority in British politics for over two decades (Ross, 2009). The estimates of academic underachievement at Key Stage 4 (KS4) are reportedly between one fifth and one third of the KS4 population in England (Steedman and Stoney, 2004). An Ofsted (2013) report identifies that pupils’ aged from 11 to 16 (early KS4) is below the national average. Underachievement in KS4 has become a recurring phenomenon (Wogboroma, 2014), with several academics and government bodies, identifying a range of significant implications, not only for the individual but also for wider society (Beinart, et al. 2002; McIntosh and Houghton, 2005; Hosie, 2007; Ofsted, 2013; DfE, 2014). This unseen cluster of learners that are academically underachieving is representative of an objectionable waste of potential, in addition incurring subsequent costs, from an individual viewpoint to a national scale (Ofsted, 2013). Consequently, recognizing and instigating timely interventions to tackle underachievement in KS4 and subsequently achieve social justice for this learner group should be a fundamental goal for schools. Motivation is recognised as an effective tool to overcome underachievement (Mega, et al. 2014) Furthermore, the intrinsic loci of motivation has developed to become an important phenomenon for educators, as it produces high-quality and effective learning in addition to creativity and achievement that can be progressively nurtured by teacher practices (Ryan & Stiller, 1991). Theories of motivation, self and society are critically evaluated to determine effective strategies...
Currently, relatively few urban poor students go past the ninth grade. The graduation rates in large comprehensive inner-city schools are abysmally low. In fourteen such New York City Schools, for example, only 10 percent to 20 percent of ninth graders in 1996 graduated four years later. Despite the fact that low-income individuals desperately need a college degree to find decent employment, only 7 percent obtain a bachelors degree by age twenty-six. So, in relation to ...
Social class has a major influence over the success and experience of young people in education; evidence suggests social class affects educational achievement, treatment by teachers and whether a young person is accepted into higher education. “34.6 per cent of pupils eligible for free school meals (FSM) achieved five or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and mathematics GCSEs, compared to 62.0 per cent of all other pupils” (Attew, 2012). Pupils eligible for FSM are those whose families earn less than £16,000 a year (Shepherd, J. Sedghi, A. and Evans, L. 2012). Thus working-class young people are less likely to obtain good GCSE grades than middle-class and upper-class young people.
Some states want to have separation when it comes to the income of these schools. States argue that high class, wealthy, school districts should have more money than the lower class districts, because of the tax payers wants or because there are better opportunities for students to grow in the wealthier areas. According to the U.S. Department of Education, more than 50 percent of lower end schools are not receiving the amount of money they should get from the state funds (U.S. Department of Education). This is what is preventing school districts in these areas from helping students with their education. The schools are forced to cut back on programs such as extracurricular activities that are suppose to encourage students to be active, or they would have to cut back on supplies where in some cases there are not enough textbooks for each student to have his or her own. The U.S. Department of Education also stated that teachers that are less paid and have less years teaching are often the ones dealing with the students in poverty. (U.S. Department of Education). This only prolongs the problem with children receiving the proper education. If they are taught by teachers who don’t know what they are teaching or those who don’t have enough experience, then the students are not going to learn the correct information or any information at all. While there are some schools