{"id":276,"date":"2018-09-21T18:06:12","date_gmt":"2018-09-21T18:06:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-socialproblems\/chapter\/11-5-improving-schools-and-education\/"},"modified":"2018-09-21T18:06:12","modified_gmt":"2018-09-21T18:06:12","slug":"11-5-improving-schools-and-education","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-socialproblems\/chapter\/11-5-improving-schools-and-education\/","title":{"raw":"11.5 Improving Schools and Education","rendered":"11.5 Improving Schools and Education"},"content":{"raw":"\n
\n

Learning Objectives<\/h3>\n
    \n
  1. Understand how helpful good schooling can be to improve the lives of low-income children.<\/li>\n
  2. Discuss the importance of good teachers.<\/li>\n
  3. List any three strategies that will improve the education of low-income students.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n

    This concluding section focuses mostly on elementary and secondary education, given its critical importance for young people\u2019s development. As we consider how to improve the nation\u2019s schools, and especially how to improve outcomes for low-income students and students of color, we need to keep in mind an important consideration: Good schooling can make an important difference for these students, and good teachers can greatly help low-income students (Chetty et al., 2011). However, a large body of research demonstrates that students\u2019 family and neighborhood backgrounds actually matter much more than the quality of schooling for their school performance (Downey & Gibbs, 2012; Ladd & Fiske, 2011). Good schooling, then, can only go so far in overcoming the many strikes that low-income students and those of color have against them even before they enter kindergarten and the problems they continue to experience thereafter. As one education writer observes,<\/p>\n


    \n Let\u2019s be realistic: Teachers aren\u2019t miracle workers. There\u2019s only so much they can do to address problems that troubled students bring to class every day, including neglect, abuse, and unaddressed medical and mental health issues. The obvious and subtle ways that poverty inhibits a child\u2019s ability to learn\u2014from hearing, visual and dental problems to higher asthma rates to diminished verbal interaction in the home\u2014have been well-documented.
    \n So let\u2019s seek to improve the state of families. Attacking schools and teachers makes everyone feel like a reformer, but the problems begin long before a child steps through the schoolhouse door. (Farhi, 2011)
    \n <\/span>\n

    \n

    Teachers and School Reform<\/h2>\n

    This understanding of low-income students\u2019 school performance has important implications for school-reform efforts. For example, if good schooling cannot ordinarily be expected to have a large impact on poor students\u2019 lives, this fact calls into question certain aspects of the \u201cNo Child Left Behind\u201d movement of the last decade. This movement, begun by the federal government, uses students\u2019 scores on standardized tests to assess the quality of their schools. Perhaps inevitably, the subsequent growth in standardized testing has meant that teachers\u2019 performance ratings have become increasingly tied to their students\u2019 standardized test scores. However, because students\u2019 test scores reflect their socioeconomic backgrounds and other nonschool factors much more than the quality of their schooling, these scores are not a good measure of teachers\u2019 performance. As one education specialist summarizes this situation, \u201cOf all the goals of the education reform movement, none is more elusive than developing an objective model to assess teachers. Studies have shown that over time, test scores do not provide a consistent means of separating good from bad instructors. Test scores are an inadequate proxy for quality because too many factors outside the teachers\u2019 control can influence student performance from year to year\u2014or even from classroom to classroom during the same year\u201d (Russell, 2011, p. WK12).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    The Need for More General Social Reform<\/h2>\n

    The importance of students\u2019 family and neighborhood backgrounds has a significant implication beyond the issue of teacher assessment: To improve low-income students\u2019 school performance, our society must address the problems of poverty and racial\/ethnic inequality. As two sociologists argue this point, \u201cIf we are serious about improving American children\u2019s school performance, we will need to take a broader view of education policy. In addition to school reform, we must also aim to improve children\u2019s lives where they spend the vast majority of their time\u2014with their families and in their neighborhoods\u201d (Downey and Gibbs, 2012, p. 85). Chapter 2 \"Poverty\"<\/a> and Chapter 3 \"Racial and Ethnic Inequality\"<\/a> discussed strategies to reduce poverty and racial\/ethnic inequality; these strategies would also help improve the school performance of low-income students and those of color.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    A School Reform Agenda<\/h2>\n

    Despite the need to address poverty and racial inequality, it remains true that schools with decaying buildings, uncommitted teachers, and other problems cannot be expected to produce students with even adequate levels of academic achievement. It is thus critical, says poverty expert Mark Robert Rank (2004, p. 208), to do everything possible to provide a quality education to the nation\u2019s poor children: \u201cTo deny children the fundamental right to a decent education is both morally wrong and bad social policy. It flies in the face of the American concept of equality of opportunity\u2026Countless studies have documented the immediate and lingering effects of disparate educational outcomes on later life. Improving public education for low-income children is absolutely essential.\u201d<\/p>\n

    In short, good schools and good teachers do matter. In particular, good elementary- and middle-school teachers have been shown to have a lifelong impact on their students: students with good teachers are more likely years later to have lower teenage pregnancy rates and higher college attendance rates, and they are also more likely to have higher salaries in adulthood (Lowrey, 2012).<\/p>\n

    Education experts urge several measures to improve the nation\u2019s schools and the education of American children (Madland & Bunker, 2011; Rokosa, 2011; Rothstein, 2010; Smerdon & Borman, 2009). These measures include the following:<\/p>\n