For fifty years Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA)
has been the primary source of federal funding targeted to schools to
serve poor children. Its purpose has been to raise achievement for poor
children through extra support to their schools to help meet their
greater educational needs. Sadly, from the beginning states didn’t keep
their end of the bargain.
In 1969, the
Washington Research Project (the Children’s Defense Fund’s parent
organization) and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.
partnered with others and examined federal audit reports on how Title I
funds were being used and talked to numerous federal, state, and local
officials and community leaders and parents about how those critical
funds were being spent. Our report, Title I: Is It Helping Poor Children?,
found the answer to our question was a resounding “No.” Rather than
serving the special needs of poor and disadvantaged children, many of
the millions of dollars Congress appropriated had been wasted, diverted,
or otherwise misused by state and local education agencies. Title I
funding was often being used as general aid and to supplant -- rather
than supplement -- state and local education funds, including for
construction and equipment unrelated to Title I goals. For example,
Fayette County, Tennessee used 90 percent of its Title I funds for
construction of a predominantly Black school despite a recent federal
court order that the school system desegregate, and Memphis, Tennessee
used Title I funds to purchase 18 portable swimming pools in the summer
of 1966.
The Children’s Defense Fund
(CDF) subsequently conducted several other major studies that reinforced
the importance of federal accountability for money targeted to help
children most in need, especially poor children and children of color.
In CDF’s first report, Children Out of School in America (1974),
after knocking on thousands of doors in census tracts across the nation
and interviewing many state and local school officials, we found that
if a child was not White, or was White but not middle class, did not
speak English, was poor, needed special help with seeing, hearing,
walking, reading, learning, adjusting, or growing up, was pregnant at
age 15, was not smart enough, or was too smart, then in too many places
school officials decided school was not the place for that child.
We
should learn from and correct our mistakes and stop repeating them over
and over again for our children’s sake. It is crucial that a strong
Title I program reach the children in areas of concentrated poverty if
and when ESEA is reauthorized. Unfortunately the House Education and
Workforce Committee, charged to lead in moving an ESEA reauthorization
bill in the House of Representatives, just approved a bill (H.R. 5)
in a party line vote that fails to target the needs of the poorest
children by adding a “portability” provision assuring these children less help. AASA, The School Superintendents Association, and many others join us in opposing the portability provision.
The
portability provision in H.R. 5 would move us backwards by distributing
the same amount for a poor child regardless of the wealth of the
district or school she attends. This will unravel the intent of Title I
by taking resources away from children in areas of concentrated poverty
and offering extra resources to schools and districts with a few poor
children who may not need them. The poorest students in schools with the
highest concentrations of poor children need extra help to combat
poverty’s barriers. Compounding this huge backwards step, H.R. 5 also
removes strong accountability provisions required to make sure the
children who need help most will actually be helped.
It
is morally indefensible and extraordinarily expensive that we have 14.7
million poor children in our country -- 6.5 million of them living at
less than half the poverty level. All of these poor children exceed the
combined residents in all 50 state capitals and the District of
Columbia. That more than 80 percent of Black and almost 75 percent or
more of Latino public school students are unable to read and compute at
grade level in 4th and 8th grades and, if they reach 9th
grade, 3 in 10 do not graduate within four years is a cause for extreme
alarm and focused attention. Without targeted federal funding with
accountability, the poorest children will lose out.
Poor
children are not the only ones at educational risk. Special measures
are needed to protect English language learners, children and youths
with disabilities, children of color, and children and youths who are
homeless or in our child welfare and juvenile justice systems. States
and school districts must target resources to address achievement gaps
for these vulnerable groups of children. The federal government must
hold states accountable for making sure they make progress towards grade
level achievement targets, high school graduation, and college and
career preparation.
The mistakes of the
past should not be repeated and children and our nation need us to move
forward, not backwards. No ESEA bill is better than a bill that has
poor children subsidize the education of wealthier children. It is way
past time for us to level the educational learning field for all
children, especially those left behind.
I often remind people that "equal" is not synonymous with "equitable" and, as Mindy writes, Title I funding was never meant to ensure equitable access to a quality education. The idea that each poor child should receive an equal allotment of funds, regardless of their school's wealth, demonstrates a lack of understanding about poverty and the learning process of a child. A relatively wealthy school serving a handful of low-income students can create a support net of services for those children. However, a school serving predominantly low-income children faces a need that is far greater than the sum of those individual needs. Poverty shapes every aspect of a child's life - their physical health, the quality of their daily meals, their ability to complete homework, their early learning experiences, and their perspective of themselves and the world. When schools see a large concentration of students struggling with these issues, these problems are compounded. Schools that serve high populations of low-income students need extra services and funds than those that don't.
ReplyDeleteWhen I begin the school year, I start by explaining to my students that they will not always be treated exactly the same way, because they are not exactly the same. Then, I show them this image: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-j2nEHzLghiA/UOhXCHwgwsI/AAAAAAAADr4/fpVr9gHLS0I/s1600/equality+vs+justice.jpg.
It is fascinating to me that my fifth graders immediately grasp this concept (and happily spend the rest of the year accepting equity, not equality), while many of our lawmakers cannot.
I immediately thought of the "separate but equal" notion that was created in 1896 with the Plessy vs. Ferguson decision. Although Brown v. Board was supposed to reverse this legal and social tradition, Title I serves as an example of the lack of educational equity that has existed and continues to exist in this country. Without basic needs being met, our poorest children cannot thrive in schools and this is an injustice on an individual and societal level. Poor children who have not eaten before school, who are not afforded adequate resources to thrive, etc. are stripped of the opportunities that their wealthier counterparts have. This reality is one that is a continued mistake, not just one of the past. In order to create the just, equitable society that every child deserves to grow in and benefit from, appropriating funds correctly is key. Not doing so is in fact a violation of rights and a hindrance to the development of a community. Here in Philadelphia there have been suits against legislative leaders, state education officials, and the Governor for failing to uphold the constitutional obligation to provide adequate resources for children to thrive in schools, meeting academic standards. Picking and choosing which schools and districts receive funding or what to allocate it to, and leaving poor children from benefiting, is a violation of a child's rights. This separation does not lead to equality, or even better justice. We must continue to challenge our legislators and state officials so that they do what is best for all children; by doing that, society as a whole will benefit.
ReplyDeleteTiffany, in your response you stated "without the basic needs being met, our poorest children cannot thrive in schools" - this is CORRECT! Often times, we fail to realize how essential it is that our, specifically our children, basic needs are met. It can be highly difficult to pay attention in class when your last meal was school lunch from yesterday and it can be highly difficult to stay awake in class when you are up all night because you do not have a safe place to lay your head. Instead of meeting the child's basic needs, society would rather categorize them as incompetent. That is ridiculous.
DeleteLoved reading your post Tiff!
Jenny's comment about "equality" vs "equity" was spot on! There was a teacher who taught this lesson to her students. She would tell her students to remove their left shoe and place them into a pile. She would then go around and pass the shoes back at random. She told the students to put on their new shoes, and inevitably the complaints started in regards to how the shoes did not match and did not fit. The teacher explained to them that she had done everything equally, that it did not seem fair to give someone more shoe simply because they had “more foot.” A student then proclaimed that it was not about who had more shoe, rather it was about having the right shoes for each individual. THAT is equity. To many people confuse the two not only on an individual level, but on a structural level as well.
ReplyDeleteStudents who come from a low-income family do not face the same challenges as a student who comes from a family that is well off. School systems and regulation related to them have not accounted for that when planning out how to regulate schools and their funds; this is evident in the ESEA Bill. It does not matter is a school system gets multiple swimming pools for students if their basic needs are not even being met. This is a problem outside of the school system as much as it is a problem within it. Until we abandon the idea of equality and sprint towards the idea of equity, low-income children will have an much more difficult time getting to where they need and deserve to be.
Dasha,
DeleteYour example was a perfect picture of what this whole article is about. What bothers me the most about our educational system is that we have a "one sizes fits all" mentality. In other words, the system creates variations of the same curriculum materials and test but not the same resources to make sure children are properly prepared for test or life. I think that if America ever held education to the same standards as we do professional sports, we would see a significant change in our educational system. In sports, even if a team does not ever make it to a championship or wins every game it plays, there are still millions of dollars spent on training camps, educational materials to enhance the players, and whatever else the team needs to succeed. If every school in American, no matter its current performance statistics, could be given adequate resources, (technology, food, proper building structure, equipment, teachers, etc.) what kind of improvements would we witness from poor city school districts?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMindy's comment, "This explains why thousands of districts across the country spend millions of dollars on computers, smart boards, new online textbooks, standard display boards, and iPad carts."
ReplyDeleteWhen I was subbing, every student from 6-8 grade had a personal iPad (some were able to bring their iPad home, if they paid a fee) they would use throughout the day. However, most of the students would use their iPad to play games instead of doing work. Some students had no clue of how to work the iPad when it came to doing/turning in assignments, which should me what they were really doing with their iPad. The "idea" of allowing every student to have an iPad sound great, but it defeats the purpose if the students are not using the iPads the best of their ability. Which also applies to the Title I funds; it defeats the purpose if the funds are not being using to better the students.
The use of technology is on a rise, but if test scores are remaining the same, there needs to be new ways to implement learning in the classroom, even if that means going back to the old school textbook, seeing how some schools are doing away with textbooks altogether.
Title I funds have not been placed to benefit the betterment of the student's education or environment, which flows into the home. The students continue to struggle, while Title I funds are being used towards other things, some not pertaining to education.
Too often our education system has been compromised and misrepresented as a capitalist business with little intent on expanding resources for low-income communities. While reading this article I immediately thought about my own neighborhood and some of the surrounding elementary schools. In these schools I see students who do not understand that they abide by a system that has tricked them into thinking that their education awards them equality. However, their education alone will never award them equality because it lacks an understanding of individuality. No one circumstance is ever the same and it is important for l lawmakers to understand that no child is the same. It is a great disservice to our children when we assume that one achievement initiative will work for all children. Just as schools in low-income communities need additional resources just to keep up with competing magnet schools, our children need specialized resources to compete in life; especially our children coming from low-income families. In order to change this narrative there has to be change in the state of mind of our low-income communities, which includes eliminating the mindset of being poor as a disease. Our children should be able to believe that no matter what social class, race, learning disability, or ethnicity they represent the education system will accommodate their differences to help them achieve success; keeping in mind that the measures of that success looks different for each individual community, school, and child.
ReplyDelete"No one has yet fully realized the wealth of sympathy, kindness and generosity hidden in the soul of a child. The effort of every true education should be to unlock that treasure." - Emma Goldman.
ReplyDeleteThis quote resonates with me because this is how every lawmaker think should as they even consider cutting or continue to underfund programs and projects that help with the advancement of our poor children in America. There are so many research studies that have facts about how poor children are affected; there are plenty of statistics that reveal how many children can or cannot read by the time they reach high school. There is an overwhelming amount of information that prevents our children from being great. I think that it’s time to focus more on statistics which provide positive proof that our children can and will be great!
I am not surprised, moved, nor blinded sided by the international means taken to stifle the educational trajectory of students of color. From a historical perspective, there is an unprecedented amount of research that illustrates the profound relationship between race, culture, socioeconomic status, and sub-standard public education in the United States (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Noguera 2003a; Noguera 2003b).
ReplyDeleteIt is not secret; poverty has a negative influence and impact on student achievement, especially when achievement is measured by state-mandated standardized tests. Although our economy is booming with technological advances (i.e. the increased manifestation of iPads, smart pens, and chart boards in the classroom) the number of young people living in poverty is increasing. During the 2009-2010 school year, 47.5 percent of all K-12 public school students in the United States were eligible for free or reduced price lunches compared to 38.3 percent during the 2000-2001school year (National Center for Education Statistics 2011). Almost, 48% of our African American males are failing to graduate from high school (Schott Foundation, 2012). Moreover, students hailing with low socio-economics status (SES) are two and a half times as likely as White students to lack basic skills needed to be successful in school and life and only about one-third as likely perform at a proficient or advanced level of reading and math (Education Trust, 2014).
These disheartening statistics suggest that students of color, concentrated in high-poverty, low performing educational environments, are vulnerable to reduced scholastic success. A result of a capitalist nation built on the system of owning slaves and its aftermath (i.e., economic and racial inequality and social injustice), the traditional educational experience for many African Americans is and has always been destitute (Boykin & Noguera, 2011; Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2012; Cokley & Moore, 2007).
*intentional
ReplyDeleteJenny,
ReplyDeleteDING DING DING you're the real MVP.
I think this entire discussion is in regards to "Equity vs Equality" Our children deserve to have the every opportunity afforded to them never mind their circumstances. Reading this column one thing resonated with me and that was CREATIVITY. The scholars creativity is being stifled by people who do not necessarily understand the communities they are intending to help. The ESEA are pouring a surplus of funds into well established school systems and in turn the funds I am sure go to the "extra curicular activities" ie Visual, performing and vocal arts. The scholars of those systems benefit because they are presented options that when nurtured often become their career paths. So what does that say to a scholar in a school system that is in poverty?
To answer my question the ESEA unbeknowist to them are telling our children that if you or your circumstances do not fit into this tiny box then you arent worthy of these other programs and subsequently not worthy to walk in those callings.
Lets face it what are the first programs to go when budgets are cut? THE ARTS am I wrong?
Solution: I love the image Jenny posted to support her statement. We have to be critical in the way the money is disbursed. The first fruit should go to the scholars who need it the most and what is left to the scholars who will not feel the lack if any lack.
Reading this article further articulated the educational pitfalls that I have repeatedly witnessed for what seems to me a ridiculous number of years. Mismanagement of funds is extremely prevalent; and I can speak on that from experience with the school system here in Charlotte, NC both from a student and substitute teacher perspective. As a student, I attended predominantly white schools for most of my life. When I got to high school I was exposed to a racial demographic that although was like me, was completely opposite of what I had become accustomed to. The resources (i.e. money) were very few and far between and my high school was constantly belittled and ridiculed for having low test scores in comparison to higher income schools. Yet, the school was never afforded the opportunity to be on the same achievement level as others without resources to level the playing field. Although it is extremely unfortunate, this is the reality of our nation's underprivileged youth. I had not done previous research about when Title 1 started, and was completely unaware that it had been around for so long. As with many other issues that have occurred in our history, progress is at a complete standstill.
ReplyDeleteAs many of you have stated, equity is the issue here; and has been since before Brown vs. the Board of Education. People who are not on the negative receiving end often do not understand the magnitude of an issue. The problem with the idea of being “separate but equal” is that in reality, the two separate institutions will never be equal. At least not with the mindset of denial and thinking nothing is wrong. We are returning to segregated schools, making it easier for underprivileged children to continue to and more rapidly fall into the cracks. Just because something does not affect you does not mean that the issue is minute and unimportant. I wish that the entire nation would wake up. Too much is happening not to be aware.
This is another great column by Mrs. Edelman! In the last paragraph she hit home with the charge, "No ESEA bill is better than a bill that has poor children subsidize the education of wealthier children". Too often our children are being further disadvantaged by the education system and government programs the disguise themselves as means of benefiting our children. I have seen first hand how the portability provision in H.R. 5 negatively effects the education system and causes increased hardship for low-income communities and schools with limited resources.
ReplyDeleteIn north Minneapolis, MN the portability provision has completely devastated my alma-mater, North Community High School and other surrounding schools in the Minneapolis Public School District. I graduated from North in May 2007 and the school enrollment was 1300 currently today the enrollment is shy of reaching 350 students TOTAL. Wealthier and Suburban districts are being provided subsidies to transport students from the inner-city to their schools. Some might think this is a great thing, however as stated in this column it is a poor decision that leads to further disadvantaging our underrepresented children. Is it so great that these students are now going to school in these communities where teachers are not connecting with these students because they do not know how to meet them where they are? Is it so great that more student are being transported to these schools only to be left behind because they simply do not make the grade? How about the students that are left in the schools in their home communities who now have even less resources to provide a adequate education because more funding is being taking from them due to low enrollment and shuffling to wealthy communities? Yes if there is not going to be a bill the truly protects our children, then I don't believe we need one at all. Do not direct our children to a elevator only for them to find a broken staircase!
From: Stephen Hibbit
ReplyDeleteAs one who really did not think that the education that I was receiving was liberally given to me and that even though I did not attend Detroit Public School systems for middle and high school, there comes a point in which I now understand that the only reason I could not get accepted back into the school district that I was formerly apart of, was because of the dollar sign that was on my back for the continued funding for the district that I had adopted. This really brings an awareness for the generations to come simply because of the lack of effort that the federal government is putting forth to attempt to rectify this situation. I have been able to work with multiple school districts through various programs and seeing the difference of resources that are provided or the lack thereof displays the pertinent issues that our youth in the country face in poverty stricken communities. For the simplicity of it all, our youth in this country are being stolen from and then targeted to become viable products of society, without the means for the resources that are lacking in schools and communities. Why does this seem as a set up for failure? What do poverty stricken communities have to prove? Should we not be helping and assisting them even the more because of their status?
In my position as a Youth Specialist in the Group Home that I worked for, the clients who are non-English speaking individuals and are new the country and going to school in general have the ability and access to iPads. The school handed them out at the beginning of the year and it was expressed that it was only supposed to be used for educational purposes. Well, that thought went straight out of the window when they bring them home and start playing games, and we ask the clients if they have homework and their answer is always "no". We as a social service construct have certain policies that are put in place dealing with internet access, such as not being able to utilize social networks because of they are considered non-citizens. With this fact and knowing that the iPads could have possibly been purchased with these funds, is it acceptable to have even given these "educational tools" because they are not US citizens? The only reason I ask this question is because we as a country are very quick to defend poverty stricken countries thousands of miles away, spending millions to reform certain living practices but not able to see the "14.7 million poor children in our country with the 6.5 million living at less than half the poverty level?" Please tell me what looks worst?
I knew that as a male of color that I had some disadvantages and predisposed stereotypes that could possibly be the demise of my success. Being able to see the many men that look like myself attempting to create an atmosphere of social change in our communities and nation as a whole, I personally believe that there should be a re-evaluation of school districts and the right to utilize certain funds for certain resources. The federal government should be requesting itemized invoices around the tax season time to make sure that the economy even though in a deficit of debt that grows exponentially everyday, will be able to mark where these dollars are going. My thought process when I was younger was that the higher the tax bracket I would be apart of the better community I would be able to have access to and live in. Essentially, I could be successful and have my children become viable products of society but disparity of youth that will possibly go without, I cannot see myself leaving innocent children in the dust like that. We must begin to have conversations about how do we change the trajectory of where and how these funds are used to be able to ensue some type of social change in the communities where we live, have come from, and ultimately support with our tax dollars. It is stated that "without targeted federal funding with accountability, the poorest children will lose out." I do agree with this statement but I do also believe that without targeted federal funding with accountability, communities, states, and the nation will lose out on the most precious gift to our economy, OUR FUTURE!
DeleteOne of the most important points made in this post is the topic of accountability. Educational stakeholders, superintendents, administrations, teachers, and students should be outraged that state and federal funding has been misused for so many years. However, how can communities be outraged if they are unaware of the bills like ESEA? I would argue that a significant amount of people are not familiar with how politics and education are intertwined with one another especially in less affluent neighborhoods. With this in mind, I am interested in figuring out productive and creative ways to disseminate this sort of information to communities to make families aware of the educational equality their children are facing. I would hope to see that awareness of the issue would mobilize communities to really begin to hold those in charge of the allocation of educational funding more accountable of their actions than we have seen in the last few decades.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you.
DeleteThe first thing that popped out to me in this article is the lack of care from schools who have received funding from ESEA. Accountability is number one when creating new bills and funding plans to be allocated to organization who are responsible for our children. Organizations uses the lack of political knowledge in our communities to get away with accountability. How can one hold someone accountable, if they are not aware of the act that they are doing is wrong? This subject makes me think back to Karl Marx the sociologist. An people can not have a revolution until they realize that the condition in which they live in is not normal; until they realize they are being oppressed. This is why I preach and preach and will continue to preach educating our communities on policies, procedure, bills and political processes. We need to hold monthly meetings in our communities. Share this information with our friends. Currently I am at a friend house and I ask him to read this article and we are having a conversation about it. There are many avenues we can use to make our communities aware of these issues without using money. I am tempted to and probably will print this article every week and place it under my neighbors doors in my apartment complex. We need to hold our leaders accountable and the only way to do it is making our communities aware of the issues.
I have been doing a little research on the ESEA Waiver and how the scores are calculated for each school. My professor asked us to look at our own school's report card and look at the breakdown of the points. My school's ethnic background is 86% African American. In addition, 93% of our school population eats free and reduced lunch. One would think that because of this large population of children living in poverty, we would have additional funding to help our students in need. However, that has not been the case. After interviewing my principals about issues that they face, they both responded immediately by saying "funding". There is barely enough funding to hire needed personnel. As of today we are short 3 teachers which has started to affect our overall school morale. A lack of funding means that teachers like myself will not have the support and resources we need to better help our students. This causes an overall rippling effect. Student achievement, teacher quality, and morale all decrease as a result. This will cause a never ending cycle because the scores will continue to drop or remain the same.Our final score was a 43.4 which equals an "F" according to the ESEA Waiver. We went up from a 39, but we are still an "F" school according to the Waiver.
ReplyDeleteThe first line of your response completely sums it up! I am currently working at a school in which 93% of the students are in poverty. However, we are struggling to find the funding needed to hire personnel, which is the most basic necessity. Forget the computer and SmartBoard, we don't have the teachers that are needed. Just as you stated, we must always speak out and fight for our children, even if it is something as small as demanding change at your local school board meeting.
ReplyDeleteThis article really does a great job outlining just how inept and out of touch our government has become. I hate to say that I am completely unsurprised by the attempt to combat child poverty by simply appropriating an equivalent dollar amount for each child that lives in poverty. This feeble and ineffective attempt once again shows that government officials, who have zero concept of what poverty does to a child's ability to learn, cast blame on the families for being impoverished. Simply assigning a dollar amount to an impoverished child, multiplying that by the number of children at that school, and then handing said school a check shows a complete disregard for the systems that lead to certain schools having over 95% of their students on free or reduced lunch. To me, it says that these government officials don't understand environmental factors that surround children in poverty, and feel that simply appropriating money for each child is all that needs to be done to effectively combat the daily struggles a child from a low-income family faces. The idea that a wealthy school in a well-off neighborhood should receive additional funds for having a very low number of impoverished children at the expense of schools whose entire student body lives at or below the poverty line is simply incorrect. How about using the money that would be sent to these wealthier schools do restore some cut extracurricular activities? For many children, extracurricular activities such as clubs and sports teams can save their lives. Perhaps hiring full time child psychologists to work at schools and help children that go through traumatic experiences? Improving the quality of materials and equipment in poor schools? There are countless ways that these funds could be better used than the current proposal.
ReplyDeleteSadly, I believe this bill will get passed simply as a propaganda technique for the Republican Party. They will be able to trumpet how they do care about the poor and tried to assist poor children, regardless of the fact that this bill would be impressively destructive, even by their standards. I just hope President Obama has his favorite pen out to Veto this HR 5 the moment it touches his desk.
From: Keydareon Graham
ReplyDeleteFrom the beginning of this column, my attention was arrested and the chains and shackles that have been and that are still on our children when it comes to their education. It saddens me at the hardships they face because they want to boost and increase their academic levels. If the purpose of this act was to increase or raise achievement of poor children through extra support or "funding" to their schools, then why aren't they keeping up their end of the deal?
Being from Bennettsville, SC, we are a Title I school, and there is a need of funds. I see the hardships that we face. These hardships are not just the students. The teachers face them also because of the lack of resources available to them so they can help give the students what the need. Which then adds another barrier to what the students are already facing.
I feel that we are going in circles when it comes to our children education. Dr. Edelman stated, "We should learn from and correct our mistakes and stop repeating them over and over again for our children’s sake." We know what didnt work for us so that means that we have to do something different if we want to get some different results. If not, our children, our childrens' children, and our childrens' childrens' children will still have to face these problems. We must BREAK EVERY CHAIN.
I am currently an instructor at a non – Title 1 institution in what is considered one of the “rougher” sides of our city. Though the students face many adversities while attempting to receive their education, and the faculty endure countless scarcities in efforts to adequately educate our scholars, we are not considered to be Title 1. Our administration often reminds us of these barriers to education for our demographic of students and instructors. Furthermore, it suggests solutions for how to combat them. While reading this article, I was reminded of a staff meeting during which our principal alluded to the fact that we were not a Title 1 institution, “Coming from a Title 1 [school], I could only hope that our budget here is at least half of what we had at my old school,” she joked. This statement was baffling, because before that moment, it had never occurred to me that Title 1 institutions received much monetary support. Every Title 1 school I had visited appeared to be lacking in resources, employed with long term substitutes or ill inspired instructors, furnished with outdated materials, and reported to have below average or non-competitive standardized test scores. Instructor turn around ranked high and student motivation, low. After reading this article, it dawned on me that Title 1 schools do not appear this way because of a scarcity of monetary support, but because this support is often misappropriated. I am now aware that in order for Title 1 schools to serve their intended purpose, funds must be intentionally allocated to resources that directly affect scholars’ learning environments. However, it is my belief that in order for this change to be made, education-oriented individuals must persuade less empathetic policy makers and enforcers by providing arguments that appeal to their sense of business and deny the ability to perpetuate injustice. The first step is doing exactly what this article has done, dismantling ignorance through information, “For example, Fayette County, Tennessee used 90 percent of its Title I funds for construction of a predominantly Black school despite a recent federal court order that the school system desegregate, and Memphis, Tennessee used Title I funds to purchase 18 portable swimming pools in the summer of 1966”. The next steps rely on how the information is used. Though I am not yet sure of how I personally will act upon the knowledge I have received, as a servant, I accept the challenge to figure it out.
ReplyDeleteI seriously don't understand the way our world works. How much data needs to be presented before the powers that be will acknowledge that failing schools will continue to be failing schools of they keep losing funding. They need highly qualified teachers and they need resources for teachers and students if the statistics will change. Also, we need to stop treating these babies like numbers and see them as the people who will be running the society in a couple decades. It makes a lot more sense to invest in them now than to have them suck the system dry as adults because we failed them as children.
ReplyDeleteJazmin I agree with the point you made about eliminating the thought that poverty is some sort of disease that cannot be cured. Too often I see students who give up on themselves because of their economic situation. They tend to use being poor as an excuse for misbehavior or as an excuse to be mediocre. I've come to find that kids feel because of poverty they are not supposed to be smart and intelligent. I feel laws and bills should keep in mind that all children are not the same and simply leaving children behind who are not "performing" is not an option. Yes we need to move forward, but while doing so we all have a responsibility to do whatever is necessary to eventually leveling the educational learning field for all children. They deserve it.
ReplyDeleteAs a child coming up in a Tilte 1 school, and now teaching in same primary source of federal funding targeted educational institution, were severly poor children attend, I clearly see why there has been a big dispute about the misuse of Title 1 Funds. During my two years as a on public school teacher, I have encountered first hand that children surrouded in that low income area as young as six years old enter the school affected by domestic violence, drug abuse and gang activity that takes place in there home.
ReplyDeleteThe statement "without targeted federal funding with accountability, the poorest children will be left out". This statement is the most accurate and is some thing I can relate to, seeing so much potiental, but limited to the resources and the things you could do because the school could not finically support to bring the necessity needed for the school. In todays time, different educational programs need to be implemented in the school to raise achievement for poor children.
As a child coming up in a Title 1 school, and now teaching in same primary source of federal funding targeted educational institution, where severly poor children attend, I clearly see why there has been a big dispute about the misuse of Title 1 Funds. During my two years as a on public school teacher, I have encountered first hand that children surrouded in that low income area as young as six years old enter the school affected by domestic violence, drug abuse and gang activities that takes place in there home.
ReplyDeleteThe statement "without targeted federal funding with accountability, the poorest children will be left out". This statement is the most accurate and is some thing I can relate to, seeing so much potiental, but limited to the resources and the things you could do because the school could not finically support to bring the necessity needed for the school. In todays time, different educational programs need to be implemented in the school to raise achievement for poor children.
This system seems more and more like a dystopian tale than something that can feasibly enable all students' right to learn. The fact that "a bill that has poor children subsidize the education of wealthier children" is a current state of reality and life is still going on as if nothing is happening is what is inherently and disturbingly wrong with our society. That can be equated to the fact that America itself was founded upon the backs of the most oppressed and the most poor. We often point to education as a means to enlighten and bring awareness to our scholars, but this system is trying to make it so our scholars can't even focus or pay attention in class because they don't have the resources such as adequate food or shelter to be active learners. The system is cyclical and so complex that they almost want you to feel overwhelmed and exhausted by its subtleties. I am grateful for these columns that expose the ugly realities of the educational and political system. I am also impressed by the fact that parents and students are protesting inequities by boycotting exams and calling out malicious practices. I hope CDF can be a leader in teaching our youth how to strategically organize and combat the systematic oppression. This may be the current way the system is set up, but with consistent attention to the topics that people try to brush under the rug, it can and will be dismantled.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Mindy and her first sentence was my exact thought about how can a system fail someone it wasn't intended to protect. I couldn't agree more.
ReplyDeleteThe ESEA bill is the primary funding bill for Title 1 schools geared towards helping finance the education that poor students require to make sure they are receiving an equitable education. Unsurprisingly the bill hasn’t been as effective as it was intended to be because states have not been good stewards of the money allocated to them. They have even been using the monies unethically. As Mrs. Edelman said in a earlier article regarding poverty, “it is not a deficit in human resources it is a deficit in human will” to do right by people who need it most.
ReplyDelete