Vast and increasing income inequalities between the rich and poor, apparent now
in many developed economies and prominent in the U.S., are receiving a great
deal of attention as of late: Identified by The World Economic Forum as the world’s greatest risk and taken personally by Mr. Obama, income inequality is no
longer dismissed or described solely in hushed tones. Many appear to accept the
premise that income inequality itself inhibits economic growth and recovery
(e.g., see here). Add to this substantial public outcry: the Occupy
movement, for instance, is and was a direct protest against social/economic inequality and its perceived negative impacts upon citizens and societies. Here
in the U.S., even the long-cherished notion of America as the Land of Opportunity appears to be eroding.
Against this
backdrop, a variety of policy remedies (some education-related, some not) have
been proposed. In this post, I consider a potentially obvious, although
infrequently discussed, potential root cause that could thus use attention and
remediation. I argue: If we wish to reduce income inequality and
(related) promote intergenerational social mobility, we must discuss and
address the often inequitable distribution of resources (or “opportunities”)
within the education system itself.
Why education (generally speaking)? A particularly intolerable state of affairs is one in which social inequalities are large and predictable, and opportunities for intergenerational mobility are limited. Education is centrally positioned to either promote or stifle social mobility (Alexander, 2008). In a knowledge-based economy, the provision of education is the systematic way for governments to enhance citizens’ knowledge, ideally in an individually and collectively beneficial manner. Economic growth in developed economies is tied much more so to brains than brawn. The mere fact that attendance in schooling is compulsory and “free” says something about its perceived fundamentality.
What’s the problem? The problem is that, in many parts of the
United States, the benefits of education are distributed disproportionately to
individuals who are already advantaged in other ways. This inequity stems
largely from a system of local control over education, which might be (or have
been) virtuous in certain respects, but that also gives rise to great geographic inequalities. In short, systems of financing public
education that are tightly related to local taxable wealth confer greater
school funding capacity upon the relatively well-to-do. This is especially
problematic when, as often occurs in American public schools, the students who
are most in need of additional supports are least likely to receive them. It
follows logically that such systems will exacerbate more than combat inequality.
Recently, this
issue has been helpfully framed in terms of opportunity gaps; such terminology could help to shift
and improve any discussion of persistent academic achievement gaps. Eduardo Porter wrote a terrific New York Times article which includes more in-depth exploration of these topics.
Alright, so…what to do? Concerned citizens and politicians must confront this problem, difficult and
intractable as it may seem. At minimum, as an initial step, it must be openly
discussed. It is also helpful to compare and contrast the many different ways
that states have approached public school funding; some states have achieved or closely
approximated equity, and others most certainly have not. Lastly, we should
consider the very real possibility that many of the more popular education
reforms currently touted are largely a distraction from this basic issue, as
stated by David Sciarra in Mr. Porter’s article.
by Joe Malin
References
Alexander, K.
(2008). Preface. In K. Alexander (Ed.), Education and economic growth: Investment and distribution of financial
resources (pp. 1-2). Nashville,
TN: Linton Atlantic Books, Ltd.
No comments:
Post a Comment