Socioeconomic Gap in the American

¶ … Socioeconomic Gap in the American Education System

The sad truth is that in America, socioeconomic status has a direct effect on the quality and availability of an education, even in the primary and secondary schools. Not only are students often caught in the cycle of poverty and lack of educational quality and opportunities, but they are tested in culturally insensitive ways through standardized tests designed to accurately measure a very finite cross section of the population. Not only do test scores show this disparity, but other statistical data, obtained objectively, points to a correlation between financial resources and school performance. To highlight the structural functionalist approach to explaining this problem, data showing that students who come from a less educated household perform consistently worse in school will be discussed. It can also be used as a small-scale example of evidence that the current American education system perpetuates itself and that structural change is necessary in order to affect real positive results in many student populations.

Ethnic minorities are far more likely to make up populations that can be measured as economically disadvantaged (Payne, 2005, pp. 56). It is in this way that many of these populations show low test and school performance. It is not an indicator of intelligence or ethnic performance variations but instead testament to the fact that these students have less access to adequate economic and therefore educational resources. The structural functionalist approach offers some excellent solutions to the problem of socioeconomic-related performance disparity within the American education system. The approach prescribes specific antidotes that will help to change the status quo and the accepted norms, values, and traditions from the inside out.

Review of Literature

The perpetuation of the cycle of poverty and lack of opportunities is built into the American education system as Boyd-Zaharias and Pete-Bain argue. The discrimination of people based on their socioeconomic class does little to solve any problems. The same people are caught again and again in the cycle of poor education, lack of opportunities, and lack of hope. These people go on to raise families in similar situations, and the cycle is repeated. As the authors also argue, unless something is done immediately to begin to first recognize the problem, and then assess what needs to be done, and finally accomplish some headway relative to giving the lowest classes of people in America equal access to education, no progress will be made (Boyd-Zaharias and Pete-Bain, 2008, pp. 41). Those who lack opportunity also often lack hope. There is little motivation to change one's outlook on life and personal situation when the odds are stacked so heavily in favor of the wealthy classes having access to the best education.

The Time Magazine article, written by Alex Tehrani goes one step further in highlighting the fact that not only does the socioeconomic gap exist, but Americans are by and large aware of its existence, and programs like No Child Left Behind have worked to at least uncover these inequalities. Regardless of which side of the debate people fall on relative to this program, it has helped in identifying needy schools and populations in America. The next step, according to author Tehrani, is to implement a better strategy for dealing with this problem. The No Child Left Behind Act focuses on standardized results however, which have been established as one of the leading causes of educational failure and inaccurate learning measurements (Tehrani, 2007). Many schools as well as individual children have not benefited from such an overarching program, and in fact, those who are in the most need of a culturally-sensitive approach have been hurt by it.

The wide gap in standardized testing scores between the classes is also a symptom of some major educational inequalities according to Fish and Zwick and Greif-Green . Standardized testing has been debated since its inception. Many feel as though it does not fairly or accurately test certain populations and that the tests themselves are poor indicators of knowledge and intelligence. Culturally, the tests do little to separate students from different backgrounds and recognize both the cultural and socioeconomic disparities that exist in America. It is unfair to test everyone by the same standard, and it creates an educational environment where even adequate schools are teaching toward a test instead of teaching culturally and socially relevant and valuable concepts and information. Standardized testing only measures a small cross section of knowledge, but at the very least it is useful in identifying any glaring disparities between schools (Zwick and Greif-Green, 2007). Perhaps one of the paradoxical aspects of standardized testing is the fact that, through its use it has helped to highlight the notion that cultural and social learning habits and traits differ from population to population. It has served as a litmus test of sorts to help America and its educational authorities better understand how they can more accurately measure results among different populations of students. Tehrani also argues, rather simply, that standardized testing along with the No Child Left Behind Act has helped our country identify problems, but not solve them.

Joan Strouse's book, Exploring Socio-Cultural Themes in Education Readings in Social Foundations helps to shine a light on the huge gap in standardized test scores between different cultures and ethnicities. According to Strouse (2000, pp. 110), African-American, Latino, and Hispanic minority groups consistently score lower on standardized tests. Historically, this has led to a continued cycle of poverty and lack of post-secondary opportunities. Currently, the way that the education system is set up, and the heavy reliance on standardized testing like the SAT and ACT has trapped these minority groups in a cycle of poverty and educational discouragement. Terenzini et al. (2001, pp. 6) also argue this fact, showing that post-secondary educational facilities are also perpetuating this cycle. The only way this cycle can be broken is to first recognize the historical and cultural significance of its existence and then to act upon it by changing the way the educational landscape is oriented to include these minority groups in the dialogue about standardized testing. Both Strouse and Fish posit that once a better more culturally sensitive standardized testing and educational model is created, it is more than likely to result in better test scores across the board.

Authors Zwick and Greif-Green (2007, pp. 30) do an excellent job of presenting key data regarding the difference in test scores between socioeconomic and ethnic lines. They correlate low test scores and high school performance to lack of financial resources as well as the student's ethnic background. This is certainly not to say that the ethnic background is a cause of the poor performance, but the authors connect this poor performance to the idea that the tests used to measure student learning and success are not culturally specific. Or, if they are, they are overly specific to the population that benefits from them, the population that created and currently maintains the educational system. This resource is an excellent article relative to the structural functionalism approach to the problem. It presents data based on a very objective, quantitative approach as it correlates students who qualify for reduced or free lunch programs with low test scores. These students are the most disadvantaged population relative to socioeconomic status. As the complexity of the testing material changed, so did the disparity in test scores among those students who were less financially fortunate or resource wealthy.

Much of the supporting data for the argument that economic advantage or disadvantage plays a large role in deciding a student's educational opportunities and performance exists in the Owings et. al. (2001, pp. 9) and U.S. Department of Education statistics. These statistics support the conclusion that there is a direct correlation between socioeconomic status and test and school performance. This data also shows a direct correlation between certain ethnic minority performance by these same standards and the cycle of poverty that plagues so many in the African-American, Hispanic, and Latino populations (Owings, et. al., 2000, pp. 11). When this data is combined with the theoretical background and foundations applied by the sociologists and scientists who study this disparity among American students, a conclusion relative to the impact of socioeconomic status can be arrived at.

Research Proposal

In order to get a clear picture of the best ways to close the socioeconomic gap within America's education system it will be necessary to take a look at what has worked best for minority groups in the past. It is a fact that standardized testing and the status quo relative to educational standards and measurements of success are not currently working for many minority groups including African-Americans, Hispanics, and Latinos. Experimental and other currently unconventional methods of measuring student's learning have been applied in several school districts and regions across the country. When a culturally sensitive approach is applied to education and testing, these groups tend to perform better. It will be necessary to research some of the more widely accepted and most successful educational models in America.

A quantitative approach to research methodology is necessary to best understand and capture the research results. A particular set of achievements or test results needs to be arrived at in order to objectively compare two different bodies of information. Data relative to graduation and dropout rates among students as well as their parents would be relevant in showing the potential correlation between traditional education and the poverty cycle. Once a set of standards is established and norms set for both the standard education system as well as an alternative education system, data sets can be accurately compared and analyzed according to socioeconomic class, economic advantage or disadvantage, and as ethnicity.

First of all, this approach will take the form of statistical research intended to show that the specified minority groups currently do not perform as well on standardized testing as other groups. It is quite easy to find data to support this premise, and this data comes from sources within the current American educational system. Secondly, alternative schools and educational facilities will be identified and the types and methods of testing that takes place at these locations will be discussed and analyzed. Lastly, the results of these tests will be combined with same population college enrollment data and employment information to prove whether or not these populations are benefiting from alternatives to standardized testing. The research needs to be objective and hard numbers based.

While it will be relatively difficult to completely synthesize the test score disparities between socioeconomic classes, due to the fact that the data is fundamentally flawed because it comes from a flawed system itself, an attempt must be made to reconcile the statistical information obtained from within the flawed system with information obtained from alternative schools and educational facilities. A consideration must be made for the bias of the results due to the structure. When these biased results are compared, a clearer picture of just how extensive the cultural and socioeconomic bias is can emerge. The quantitative research methodology will also help to show, on a macro scale, the prevalence of the educational bias against economically disadvantaged students that currently exists.

Proposed Findings

The proposed findings will show that alternative testing approaches outside of the world of standardized testing will produce better results for minority populations. Also, the education received in these facilities will be better suited and more culturally sensitive than that of traditional education facilities. The analysis of this information and the synthesis of theory and fact will help to paint a picture of a better way forward. Once successful alternatives are identified and analyzed, the first step in changing the face of education in hopes of eliminating the current socioeconomic gap will be complete. The data will likely suggest that a complete evaluation and restructuring of the American education system as well as the popular understanding of educational opportunities and the disadvantages of low socioeconomic status is necessary.

From the perspective of structural functionalism, the only way this restructuring can be successful is through the eventual revaluation of what it means to be educationally successful in America. Schools must be held accountable for their lack of cultural sensitivity and consideration, and new standards must be adopted that reflect the changing needs and gaps in the education system. The data from the traditional education system will, at some level, likely be irreconcilable with the data obtained from the alternative schools. It is impossible to compare the test scores and means of educational development between the two different types of educational approaches and facilities, but this impossibility illustrates just how far the American education system needs to come in order to serve the entire population more fairly.

The findings will also likely suggest that many ethnic and socioeconomic minority populations have been under challenged and under funded from an educational standpoint. The disparity between schools will also be highlighted, relative to location and specific socioeconomic population centers. The findings will support the idea that a complete structural overhaul is necessary to include those students who are economically disadvantaged. The findings will also offer a road map of troubled schools and populations from which an adequate and comprehensive plan can be created to combat this disparity within the American education system.

Application of Theoretical Perspective

Structural functionalism stresses the idea that a society functions within its own predefine values, norms, and traditions (Spencer, 2005, pp. 246). The socioeconomic gap in education in America can be explained using this theoretical perspective quite readily, since the cycle of poverty and lack of educational opportunities is perpetuated by the system itself. The structure of the educational system does not allow for the fair and adequate measurement of learning and skills within certain populations and minority groups. This system functions for the majority of the American population, and has for years. But just a structural functionalism stresses the idea that the status quo is so because the majority accepts it as a valuable and traditional means of living life, the socioeconomic gap between classes and ethnicities can go away until the structure of the education system itself is altered. The people who create the system are the same ones who benefit from its structure (Spencer, 2005, pp. 246). This is evidenced in the education world by the fact that the majority of students are able to adequately perform well on standardized testing and respond rather well to the type of education currently available. It's not just about race however, as discussed previously, access to financial resources has also historically played a large role in defining or limiting the educational opportunities of many Americans.

The "organs" of society, as popularized by sociologist Herbert Spencer's work function to propagate themselves and their systems. These organs, as in the case of the American education system, represent the need for students and citizens to conform to the norms and values of the society as a whole. This conformity creates cultural conflict, as evidenced by consistently poor standardized test scores among certain minority populations as well as the perpetuation of this cycle. Many minorities are completely unable to conform to the American educational norms and values and so suffer because of this (Fish, 2001). It is unfair for any group to be treated as such, and in order to enact change, from a structural functionalist standpoint, the complex system of equilibriums needs to be challenged and updated to reflect the needs and values of other cultures, not just the majority. At the very least an adaptive educational cycle needs to be implemented in order to better suit the minorities that are disadvantaged by traditional American models of education.