Running head: CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

Closing The Economic Gap Through Education Equality

Stephany Avila
Portland State University
March 19, 2015

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

According to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (2009)

nearly 40 percent of children in the US lived in low-income families (those at
or below the poverty level) in 2007. The U.S. Department of Health & Human
Services fails to reveal the ages of the subjects and origin of the study, but
the study was funded by funded by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which
leads me to believe that it is a credible source. Students are taught to salute
and pledge their allegiance to the flag and to this country; one nationfor
liberty and justice for all. The US claims that everyone has equal education
opportunities for a better life, regardless of their background. While things
are certainly better than they were 60 years ago when schools were
segregated, education quality is not the same for everyone. The truth is that
many of American youth are disenfranchised and deprived of a proper
education. Lack of a proper education will only aggravate the economic gap.
According to Porter (2014) a worsening economic gap contributes to
mental illness. It increases obesity and teenage pregnancy. It fosters crime. It
lowers life expectancy. These ills dont affect just the poor. They affect
everybody. One might think that the economic gap only has economic
repercussions, but they impact almost all aspects of life. To mitigate the
effects of education inequality, education departments should reserve
additional resources to schools based on need. Schools that enroll children
with fewer resources should receive more funding than those whom enroll
children from more affluent neighborhoods. By enforcing policies that
dismantle education inequality, instead of fortifying it, more students can be

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

successful in classrooms, labor force, and in life.

According to a study conducted by Fldvri and van Leeuwen (2011)
models that are generally used to specify some relationship between
human capital and education, we find that theoretically they all should lead
to a weak if not completely non-existent relationship between educational
and income inequality. Fldvri and van Leeuwen found virtually no
evidence to prove that there is a correlation between education and income
inequality. This means that education quality practically has no effect on
ones income potential. This source is peer reviewed, Fldvri is part of the
Faculty of Economics and Business Administration at the University of
Debrecen in Hungary, while van Leeuwen is part of the Department of
Economics at the University of Warwick in the UK.
Education inequality has been a lasting problem in American history,
Kinshasa (2006) states that in the South, segregation was supported in the
Supreme Court in the Plessy vs. Ferguson case in 1896. This ordered that
schools segregate black and white students. In the North, school officials
intentionally separated into districts with the intention to segregate the area,
though there were no segregation laws. This kind of racial inequality
assigned African American students to sub par education because of the
district that they were designated had less funding for their education, this
meant that the district could not afford good teachers, and often settled for
those less qualified.

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

In 1954, McBride (2006) explained that in Brown vs. Board of Education

of Topeka the Supreme Court ruled that segregation in public schools was
unconstitutional. The ruling forced public schools to desegregate, inverting
the law that had been in place since 1896. Integrated schools were both
encouraged and restricted by several court rulings and emotional, political,
and public policy battles. In 1955, Subsequent to Brown and Brown II,
education became the primary focus of what is known as the Souths
massive resistance to court rulings. According to the Leadership
Conference of Civil Rights Education Fund (n.d.) Desegregating public schools
was not an easy task; Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus didnt make this
process any easier when he ordered the states national guard to impede the
nine African American students, known as the Little Rock Nine, from entering
Little Rock Central High School in 1957. The conflict concluded after nearly a
month when President Eisenhower sent US troops to protect the nine
students. By 1980, federal courts, for the most part, had eradicated
segregation in public schools in the south. Furthermore, the government also
had put numerous cities in the North under investigation and required that
the districts be adjusted to include minorities and attempt to make education
among whites and minorities equal.
In the 1970s, there was a huge urban sprawl movement in which
mainly middle-class African Americans and whites moved to suburban areas.
Carey (2004) says that this left lower class African Americans and Hispanic
Americans minorities, in urban areas, to attend meager schools. The federal

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

governments role is to ensure safety and to meet the minimum education

requirements, and contribute a small amount of funds; the responsibility to
provide adequate education falls on the state itself.
Prior to the 20th century, local districts were in charge of the states
public education system. Carey (2004) asserts that more than half of the
schools funding derived from local taxes, which meant that the district
inhibited dictated the quality of public education that one would receive. A
Nation At Risk, a commission report, was released in 1983. It revealed that
students from other industrial societies were outperforming American
students on international academic tests. After the release of the report, the
government started to increase their involvement in the education system
and has since passed reforms that have strengthened the education system.
In 2002, George W. Bush passed the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
reform, Casellas and Shelly (2012) report that this reform challenged schools
to get results based on the students scores on tests carried out by the state
given to students in 3rd to 8th grade every year. This article is peer reviewed,
Casellas is part of the Department of Government at the University of Texas,
Austin, and Shelly is a professor at Wake Forest University. The purpose of
the new law was to ensure that all students received the same education and
academic standards; it also helped establish which schools were presenting
low scores in math and reading. If a certain school did not meet the
requirements, students have the option to transfer to other schools in the

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

district with better scores; it also requires teachers to meet the states
certification requirements and must be proficient in their subject area. If a
school consistently fails to meet the criteria, the government ultimately
holds the right to take control of that school. The No Child Left Behind Reform
was meant to rectify education inequality, but the reform proved to be
flawed. NCLB permitted states to design their own standards of proficiency
and their own testsNCLB thus created incentives for states to lower
standards, making it easier to report that their students were meeting
mandated levels of proficiency (Derthick & Dunn, p. 1019, 2009). Congress
gave states the ability to set their own standards so that each state met
standards their own way. Congress gave states the ability to set their own
standards so that they could address the strengths and weaknesses of its
schools, districts, students, and teachers. But instead the NCLB Act
unintentionally enticed states to lower their standards to make their students
appear to be competent even if they werent.

The biggest problem with public education is how they are funded and
where the money goes. Since the state provides schools with most of the
funds, it is the state itself that gets to dictate where the funds go. Carey
(2004) claims that the federal government only provides schools with less
than ten percent of the income and it is only meant to enhance resources. If
states allocated equal amounts to its districts it would help close the funding
gap between different districts that are made up of high and low poverty

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

rates. A report conducted in 2004 showed that out of 50 states, 36 of them

have a funding gap. The average funding gap for the US was reportedly
$1,348. States like Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Minnesota give more
resources to areas that have high poverty rates, even after considering that
it costs more money to provide education for poor kids. Though there are
many factors that add to the flames, funding gaps dont seem to help, all
they seem to do is amplify the effects of inequality of Americas youth.
Having qualified teachers is essential for kids to get a good education.
Teachers salaries are dictated by factors such as years of experience, time
in a particular district, certification, and the level of education that the
teacher received, involvement with extracurricular activities. Poor children
and children of color are disproportionately assigned to teachers with the
least preparation and the weakest academic backgroundsBecause of the
way that teachers are paid, impecunious districts are unable to afford quality
teachers (Murnane & Steele, 2007, p. 15). This means that children living in
areas with high poverty rates are receiving an education of less quality
because schools in these areas cannot afford to pay adequate teachers.
There are many things that can be done to decrease the achievement
gap such as reserving additional resources (funds) to schools based on
student needs. Schools serving children from homes with fewer resources
should receive more per-student funding than those serving students in
wealthier neighborhoods. Tutoring should be offered to low-income students
so that they can receive additional support in school, programs such as the

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

Boys and Girls Club aid primarily low-income children, this organization and
its staff encourage its members to do homework and even provide
assistance. This club also serves to keep todays youth safe and out of
trouble by providing a healthy environment and off of the streets. Properly
equipped libraries can be very useful to low-income students by providing
computers and Internet access, which otherwise would not be available to
them. There is a lot of help already out there, but unfortunately it is not
enough to help everyone in need.
Many people believe that education inequality affects only those that
arent getting a proper education, but this is not true at all. Youth coming
from low-income families are more likely to get involved in risky behaviors
during adolescence, therefore affecting everyone around them.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2009) study
found the following: Youth from low-income families are more likely
than youth from middle- and high-income families to have sex before
age 16, become a member of a gang, attack someone or get into a
fight, steal something worth more than 50 dollars, and ever run away.
A vast majority of teenage mothers are single parents, whom lack a
complete education, and will most likely end up on welfare. Which can cost
our society billions of dollars every year. Incarcerated gang members are
economic burden to society as jails and prisons have become overpopulated
which will drive the cost to increase, small businesses will lose customers,
which will result in a loss of revenue. Not to mention the amount of violence

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

that a gang will bring to a community. Keep in mind that these are only a few
of the consequences of leaving education inequality unattended, it is in
everyones best interest to make education as equal as possible to help close
the achievement gap.

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

10

References:
Arocho, J. (2014). Inhibiting Intrastate Inequalities: A Congressional Approach
To Ensuring Equal Opportunity To Finance Public Education, Michigan
Law Review, 112(8), 1479-1505. Retrieved from
http://repository.law.umich.edu/michigan_law_review/
Carey, K. (2004). The Funding Gap 2004 Many States Still Shortchange LowIncome and Minority Students. (2004, September 1). Retrieved from
http://edtrust.org/resource/the-funding-gap-report-2004/
Casellas, J., & Shelly, B. (2012). No Latino Left Behind? Determinants of
Support for Education Reform in the U.S. Congress. Journal Of Latinos &
Education, 11(4), 260-270. DOI:10.1080/15348431.2012.715505
Derthick, M., & Dunn, J. M. (2009). FALSE PREMISES: THE ACCOUNTABILITY
FETISH IN EDUCATION. Harvard Journal Of Law & Public Policy, 32(3),
1015-1034. Retrieved from http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/
Fldvri, P., & van Leeuwen, B. (2011). Should less inequality in education
lead to a more equal income distribution?. Education Economics, 19(5),
537-554. doi:10.1080/09645292.2010.488472
Gorski, P. (2012). Perceiving the Problem of Poverty and Schooling:
Deconstructing the Class Stereotypes that Mis-Shape Education
Practice and Policy, Equity & Excellence in Education, 45(2), 302-319.
DOI: 10.1080/10665684.2012.666934

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

11

Johnson, J. O. (2014). Still Separate, Still Unequal: The Relation of

Segregation in Neighborhoods and Schools to Education Inequality.
Journal Of Negro Education, 83(3), 199-215. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.7709/jnegroeducation.83.3.0199?
uid=3739856&uid=2129&uid=2134&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=373
9256&sid=21106138129533
Kinshasa, K. M. (2006). An Appraisal of Brown v. Board of Education, Topeka
KS. (1954) and the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Western Journal Of Black
Studies, 30(4), 16-23. Retrieved from
http://public.wsu.edu/~wjbs/archive1.html
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund. (n.d.). School
Desegregation and Equal Education Opportunity. Retrieved from
http://www.civilrights.org/resources/civilrights101/desegregation.html
McBride, A. (n.d.). Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Retrieved from
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_brown.html
Murnane, R. J., & Steele, J. L. (2007). What Is the Problem? The Challenge of
Providing Effective Teachers for All Children. Future Of Children, 17(1),
15-43. Retrieved from
http://futureofchildren.org/publications/journals/article/index.xml?
journalid=34&articleid=74
Porter, E. (2014, March 25). Income Equality: A Search for Consequences.
The New York Times. Retrieved from

CLOSING THE ECONOMIC GAP

12

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/26/business/economy/making-senseof-income-inequality.html
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2009). Vulnerable Youth
and the Transition to Adulthood. Retrieved from
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/09/vulnerableyouth/3/index.shtml