“One of the saddest days of my life was when my mother told me Superman did not exist. I was like ‘what do you mean he's not real?’ and she thought I was crying because it's like Santa Claus is not real and I was crying because there was no one coming with enough power to save us” (Guggenheim, Waiting for Superman). Geoffrey Canada, an activist, educator, and CEO of Harlem Children’s Zone, spoke in the documentary Waiting for ‘Superman’ about the plight of our high-need schools and how these schools effect the communities that they serve, and he is absolutely right when he speaks on hope. In this day and age, education is key to success in the United States. However, I would argue that many of our students are being cut short in this world due to their quality of education, and these cut-off students are disproportionately minority students. In this paper, I hope to address a vital question: what is holding minority students back in their K-12 education and are we, as a country, addressing the needs of our minority students adequately? Are we providing the “Superman” that our minority students are seeking?
The United States officially desegregated public schools in 1954, when the Supreme Court “struck down the racially segregated school system that had been previously mandated by state law in much of the South” and “ruling that separate schools for white and nonwhite students are inherently unequal” in Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka et al. This decision, however, did not address segregation within school districts. The white middle class began their migration to the suburbs and, hence, the minority ghetto developed in many urban areas, making de facto segregation increasingly prevalent. This issue was addressed in the 1971 case, Swann vs. Charlotte-Macklenburg Board of Education, when the court help that the district serving the Charlotte, North Carolina area “had to integrate its schools, even if it required the busing of children” (Smith, pg. 7-8). Charles V. Willie states in The Education of African-Americans that this “desegregation is the most important enhancement to education in the United States in recent years” (26). However, this does not stand as the “all clear” for desegregated school districts.
Many of our urban, high-poverty schools in America have been notorious for their consistently low test-scores, high drop out rates, and inability to meet state requirements. Our high-poverty schools also disproportionately serve minority students, with nearly 70% of students in these schools identifying as African American or Latino (Fact Sheet, NAACP). The dropout rates of African American students is nearly double that of their white counterparts, similar to other minority groups. Graduation rates of white students in every state was never below 70%, however, there were 15 states in the 2007-2008 school year with minority graduation rates below 60% (some as low as 48%) (State Comparison).
One of the largest hindrances on the success of our high-need schools is the funding dilemma. In most cases, funding for schools come from property taxes, meaning that lower income neighborhoods are put at a disadvantage because they will be receiving less money from taxes. Additionally, our urban school districts serve mostly minority and low-income families. Thus, logically, schools that serve more minority students will receive less local and state funding than schools that serve less minority students. The amount of funding that a school receives can easily dictate its success. The more funding you have to use, the more resources you have at your disposal to promote student success. For example, a school with more funding could offer smaller class sizes, state-of-the-art technology, and the latest books to their students, all of which can be used more effectively to promote learning (“Factors in K12 Education”, 30). Due to these disparities in resources, our educational system is creating a ceiling for the success of our minority and low-income students.
The financial dividends between inner city and suburban schools only grow larger as time passes as white families opt out of inner city schools and move to districts that will provide a “better education”. Mary Masterson, a mother of two who was interviewed on the topic of education in St. Louis, admits that she based her decision to move away from University City school district to Kirkwood school district based on the “reputation and economic class of the area.” In other words, she is “moving her daughters to a whiter, more affluent area so that they could go to school with kids from middle-class families”. As families such as the Masterson’s (middle-class, fairly affluent families) move away from inner city schools, the funding only goes down and the stigma of inner city schools being for minorities increases (Shapiro, 156).
While the simple solution would be to get minority students into suburban schools and vice versa to even out the playing field, most low-income, minority families do not have the option of moving to a “better” school. Similar to Mary Masterson’s aspirations for her daughters, Latoya Milton dreamed of having her daughter attend Kirkwood schools, but she knew there would be sacrifices that Mary would never even have to think about. “I would not be able to have a telephone, and I could not be able to take car insurance probably, which is a law” Milton says, “I probably would never have a big house like I want, but I would do it for her education” (Shapiro, 157). Almost every family has the best in mind for their child and would switch to a better school in a heartbeat if the means were available to them. However, too many minority students are left to fend for themselves in “drop out factories” and other low-performing schools due to and status that they have no control over.
Another hindrance to achievement equality in our schools among white students and minority students is the inadequate preparation of teachers for the disadvantages that minority students come into formal education with. For example, early literacy experiences prior to beginning formal education are key to “literacy socialization” in children. Children in high-literacy families tend to be exposed to more literacy artifacts and, in turn, learned to form “what” explanations, reason explanations, and affective explanations, all of which are types of answers they will need to form on tests once they enter school (Harris et al., 128). Additionally, there has been a strong positive correlation between preliteracy test scores in preschoolers and their interest in literacy, engagement in literacy experiences, and amount of time spent on literacy activities (131).
The failure to read adequately coming into kindergarten is much more likely in poor, non-white, and non- native English speaking students. The number of literacy artifacts and the amount of time spent joint-reading and having reading promoted is much lower in most low socioeconomic status homes, many of which minority families fall under (Harris et al., 133). Thus, as children come into formal education, they are starting with a nearly blank slate for reading skills. Many teachers, unfortunately, do not have sufficient knowledge in language development, phonetics, and cognitive development, and consequently the importance of phonetic awareness, language abilities, and reasoning skills for reading. Many teachers “may incorrectly assume that the child just isn’t working hard enough or is not paying attention, when the real problem may be that the child needs some direct instruction in basic literacy knowledge” (Harris et al., 138). Because of pitfalls such as this from schools, many minority students fall behind right away and perpetuate the achievement gap because of a resource that, once again, was never afforded to them.
The disproportion of under-qualified teachers in low-income areas compared to that of high-income areas is a subject for concern. The Association of Study for Higher Education found in their study, “Racial and Ethnic Minority Students’ Success in STEM Education”, that the increased exposure to unqualified teachers is a major factor in the growth of the achievement gap. According to the ASHE, “the percentage of teachers in high-poverty schools who are inexperienced is 20 percent, compared with 11 percent of those at low-poverty schools. In addition, “whereas out-of-field teachers teach 19 percent of classes in low-poverty schools, that figure is 34 percent in high-poverty schools.” Similarly, “White fifth graders were 51 percent more likely to be taught by teachers with a master’s or advanced degree than their Black and Hispanic peers” (33). Without a highly qualified teacher, students are put at a disadvantage before the semester begins. In Waiting for Superman, they explain that a highly qualified/highly effective teacher can help their students learn 150% of the material (they can push their students to more advanced concepts), while under qualified/underperforming teachers could teach as low as 50% of their content in a school year (Guggenheim, Waiting for Superman). The margin for the next year between those two students creates an unfair playfield for the rest of their educational career. This illustrates how important highly qualified teachers are in our schools, especially for the advancement of our minority students.
Other examples of these innate disadvantages are the biases that teachers bring into the classroom about specific groups of students. Teachers may “lower their expectations because students are black, low income, fatherless, or poorly dressed”, meaning “African American students that receive the greatest brunt of disrespect and low expectations are inner-city African American males in the upper grades-dark skinned, speaking Ebonics, and trapped in remedial classes” (Kunjufu, 94). For this reason, teachers evaluations of students may differ based on a students race. Some examples may include students acting in a very similar way, but the teacher labeling them in different ways: the black student is “verbally and physically aggressive”, but the white student being “quiet, laconic”, or the black student having “no respect for private property; thinks anything in the class ‘belongs’ to him” and the white student “often shy about sharing; wants ‘one of her own’” (Pendergast, 78). These predetermined prejudices that are brought into the classroom are detrimental to a students learning and, ultimately, that affects the future of a student. If a student does not feel safe, challenged, or assured in a learning environment, there is no way they are going to want to continue learning. While students, on average, receive less positive affirmation directly from their teachers, this is because teachers often find that they need to challenge their white students more and “go easy” on their minority students. Since the minority students are not in an environment that allows for intellectual or personal growth and, as they get into higher grades, this leads to lower academic drive and achievement (Capizzi).
My final argument for the disparaging educational gap for our minority students in the United States is the overwhelming lack of academically challenging opportunities for minority students. This refers slightly to funding schools, but also to the overall stigma that minority students achieve less than their white counterparts. Minority students are overwhelming tracked, or put on a class-planning course, to low-ability or remedial tracks, despite similar or better standardized test scores in comparison to white peers. Since these students are tracked into these courses all through elementary school, this ultimately lessens their mathematics and science skills coming into middle and high school. If a student does not have a firm grasp on advanced math and science concepts, there is a limit on their postsecondary choices, so this tracking ultimately alters a minority student’s postsecondary options (“Factors in K12”, 31).
On top of the uneven tracking of minority students, there is a large void of Advancement Placement (AP) courses available at low-income, heavily minority-serving schools. Many urban schools do not offer advanced courses, meaning that students at that school do not have the opportunity to challenge themselves and prepare themselves for college exams. This, in turn, leads minority students to test lower than their white peers on college placement exams, leading to less post-secondary enrollment. Interestingly enough, even when AP/IB courses are offered as predominantly minority schools, many students choose not to take them because 1) they have been on the remedial track and do not have the knowledge quite yet to wrestle with the rigor of an advanced course and 2) they have not typically been represented in advanced classes. If someone doesn’t see another person like himself or herself in a new situation, they are much less likely to voluntarily enter into that situation. Again, the lack of rigor in their curriculum on the “lower” track leads to less success in college placement exams and, therefore, fewer placements into postsecondary institutions (“Factors in K12”, 32).
In the past 60 years, the United States has come a long ways in our educational system. We are still progressing with initiatives like President Barack Obama’s “White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans”, giving solutions and actions that the White House plans to take to combat the achievement gap in the African American community. Solving the educational disparity for minority students goes beyond the school- it really looks at the socioeconomic issues of these areas as well. However, there are biases and outdated practices that can be addressed in our schools today, and new practices that address the differences in our diverse communities can be employed as well. Are we the Superman that students may need? Not quite, but we are working on it. As a future educator, I hope that I can be an agent of change in this particular area. Someday, education will be the Superman to all of those waiting for be taken far, far away from their current situation and to the dreams that they have been fostering since they were placed in it.
Reference List
Capizzi, C. (2012, May 3). Are Educators Showing A “Positive Bias“ To Minority Students – and Keeping Them From Doing Their Best?. Rutgers Newark. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from http://www.newark.rutgers.edu/news/educators-showing-positive-bias-minority
Fact Sheet. (2009, January 1). African Americans and Education. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from naacp.3cdn.net/e5524b7d7cf40a3578_2rm6bn7vr.pdf
(2011). Factors in K--12 Education That Influence the Success of Racial and Ethnic Minority Students in the STEM Circuit. ASHE Higher Education Report, 36(6), 27-52. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from the EBSCO Host database.
Guggenheim, D. (Director). (2011). Waiting for "Superman" [Documentary]. United States: Paramount Home Entertainment.
Harris, J. L., Kamhi, A. G., & Pollock, K. E. (2000). Literacy in African American communities. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.
Jackson, C. L. (2001). African American education: a reference handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, Inc..
Kunjufu, J. (2002). Black students-Middle class teachers. Chicago, Ill.: African American Images.
Obama, B. (2012, July 26). Executive Order -- White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans. The White House. Retrieved May 6, 2013, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/26/executive-order-white-house-initiative-educational-excellence-african-am
Prendergast, C. (2003). Literacy and racial justice: the politics of learning after Brown v. Board of Education. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Shapiro, T. M. (2004). The hidden cost of being African American: how wealth perpetuates inequality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, W. D., & Chunn, E. W. (1989). Black education: a quest for equity and excellence. New Brunswick, N.J., U.S.A.: Transaction Publishers.
State Comparison. (2008, January 1). United States Education Dashboard. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from http://dashboard.ed.gov/statecomparison.aspx?i=e&id=2&wt=0
Willie, C. V., Garibaldi, A. M., & Reed, W. L. (1991). The Education of African-Americans. New York: Auburn House.
The United States officially desegregated public schools in 1954, when the Supreme Court “struck down the racially segregated school system that had been previously mandated by state law in much of the South” and “ruling that separate schools for white and nonwhite students are inherently unequal” in Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka et al. This decision, however, did not address segregation within school districts. The white middle class began their migration to the suburbs and, hence, the minority ghetto developed in many urban areas, making de facto segregation increasingly prevalent. This issue was addressed in the 1971 case, Swann vs. Charlotte-Macklenburg Board of Education, when the court help that the district serving the Charlotte, North Carolina area “had to integrate its schools, even if it required the busing of children” (Smith, pg. 7-8). Charles V. Willie states in The Education of African-Americans that this “desegregation is the most important enhancement to education in the United States in recent years” (26). However, this does not stand as the “all clear” for desegregated school districts.
Many of our urban, high-poverty schools in America have been notorious for their consistently low test-scores, high drop out rates, and inability to meet state requirements. Our high-poverty schools also disproportionately serve minority students, with nearly 70% of students in these schools identifying as African American or Latino (Fact Sheet, NAACP). The dropout rates of African American students is nearly double that of their white counterparts, similar to other minority groups. Graduation rates of white students in every state was never below 70%, however, there were 15 states in the 2007-2008 school year with minority graduation rates below 60% (some as low as 48%) (State Comparison).
One of the largest hindrances on the success of our high-need schools is the funding dilemma. In most cases, funding for schools come from property taxes, meaning that lower income neighborhoods are put at a disadvantage because they will be receiving less money from taxes. Additionally, our urban school districts serve mostly minority and low-income families. Thus, logically, schools that serve more minority students will receive less local and state funding than schools that serve less minority students. The amount of funding that a school receives can easily dictate its success. The more funding you have to use, the more resources you have at your disposal to promote student success. For example, a school with more funding could offer smaller class sizes, state-of-the-art technology, and the latest books to their students, all of which can be used more effectively to promote learning (“Factors in K12 Education”, 30). Due to these disparities in resources, our educational system is creating a ceiling for the success of our minority and low-income students.
The financial dividends between inner city and suburban schools only grow larger as time passes as white families opt out of inner city schools and move to districts that will provide a “better education”. Mary Masterson, a mother of two who was interviewed on the topic of education in St. Louis, admits that she based her decision to move away from University City school district to Kirkwood school district based on the “reputation and economic class of the area.” In other words, she is “moving her daughters to a whiter, more affluent area so that they could go to school with kids from middle-class families”. As families such as the Masterson’s (middle-class, fairly affluent families) move away from inner city schools, the funding only goes down and the stigma of inner city schools being for minorities increases (Shapiro, 156).
While the simple solution would be to get minority students into suburban schools and vice versa to even out the playing field, most low-income, minority families do not have the option of moving to a “better” school. Similar to Mary Masterson’s aspirations for her daughters, Latoya Milton dreamed of having her daughter attend Kirkwood schools, but she knew there would be sacrifices that Mary would never even have to think about. “I would not be able to have a telephone, and I could not be able to take car insurance probably, which is a law” Milton says, “I probably would never have a big house like I want, but I would do it for her education” (Shapiro, 157). Almost every family has the best in mind for their child and would switch to a better school in a heartbeat if the means were available to them. However, too many minority students are left to fend for themselves in “drop out factories” and other low-performing schools due to and status that they have no control over.
Another hindrance to achievement equality in our schools among white students and minority students is the inadequate preparation of teachers for the disadvantages that minority students come into formal education with. For example, early literacy experiences prior to beginning formal education are key to “literacy socialization” in children. Children in high-literacy families tend to be exposed to more literacy artifacts and, in turn, learned to form “what” explanations, reason explanations, and affective explanations, all of which are types of answers they will need to form on tests once they enter school (Harris et al., 128). Additionally, there has been a strong positive correlation between preliteracy test scores in preschoolers and their interest in literacy, engagement in literacy experiences, and amount of time spent on literacy activities (131).
The failure to read adequately coming into kindergarten is much more likely in poor, non-white, and non- native English speaking students. The number of literacy artifacts and the amount of time spent joint-reading and having reading promoted is much lower in most low socioeconomic status homes, many of which minority families fall under (Harris et al., 133). Thus, as children come into formal education, they are starting with a nearly blank slate for reading skills. Many teachers, unfortunately, do not have sufficient knowledge in language development, phonetics, and cognitive development, and consequently the importance of phonetic awareness, language abilities, and reasoning skills for reading. Many teachers “may incorrectly assume that the child just isn’t working hard enough or is not paying attention, when the real problem may be that the child needs some direct instruction in basic literacy knowledge” (Harris et al., 138). Because of pitfalls such as this from schools, many minority students fall behind right away and perpetuate the achievement gap because of a resource that, once again, was never afforded to them.
The disproportion of under-qualified teachers in low-income areas compared to that of high-income areas is a subject for concern. The Association of Study for Higher Education found in their study, “Racial and Ethnic Minority Students’ Success in STEM Education”, that the increased exposure to unqualified teachers is a major factor in the growth of the achievement gap. According to the ASHE, “the percentage of teachers in high-poverty schools who are inexperienced is 20 percent, compared with 11 percent of those at low-poverty schools. In addition, “whereas out-of-field teachers teach 19 percent of classes in low-poverty schools, that figure is 34 percent in high-poverty schools.” Similarly, “White fifth graders were 51 percent more likely to be taught by teachers with a master’s or advanced degree than their Black and Hispanic peers” (33). Without a highly qualified teacher, students are put at a disadvantage before the semester begins. In Waiting for Superman, they explain that a highly qualified/highly effective teacher can help their students learn 150% of the material (they can push their students to more advanced concepts), while under qualified/underperforming teachers could teach as low as 50% of their content in a school year (Guggenheim, Waiting for Superman). The margin for the next year between those two students creates an unfair playfield for the rest of their educational career. This illustrates how important highly qualified teachers are in our schools, especially for the advancement of our minority students.
Other examples of these innate disadvantages are the biases that teachers bring into the classroom about specific groups of students. Teachers may “lower their expectations because students are black, low income, fatherless, or poorly dressed”, meaning “African American students that receive the greatest brunt of disrespect and low expectations are inner-city African American males in the upper grades-dark skinned, speaking Ebonics, and trapped in remedial classes” (Kunjufu, 94). For this reason, teachers evaluations of students may differ based on a students race. Some examples may include students acting in a very similar way, but the teacher labeling them in different ways: the black student is “verbally and physically aggressive”, but the white student being “quiet, laconic”, or the black student having “no respect for private property; thinks anything in the class ‘belongs’ to him” and the white student “often shy about sharing; wants ‘one of her own’” (Pendergast, 78). These predetermined prejudices that are brought into the classroom are detrimental to a students learning and, ultimately, that affects the future of a student. If a student does not feel safe, challenged, or assured in a learning environment, there is no way they are going to want to continue learning. While students, on average, receive less positive affirmation directly from their teachers, this is because teachers often find that they need to challenge their white students more and “go easy” on their minority students. Since the minority students are not in an environment that allows for intellectual or personal growth and, as they get into higher grades, this leads to lower academic drive and achievement (Capizzi).
My final argument for the disparaging educational gap for our minority students in the United States is the overwhelming lack of academically challenging opportunities for minority students. This refers slightly to funding schools, but also to the overall stigma that minority students achieve less than their white counterparts. Minority students are overwhelming tracked, or put on a class-planning course, to low-ability or remedial tracks, despite similar or better standardized test scores in comparison to white peers. Since these students are tracked into these courses all through elementary school, this ultimately lessens their mathematics and science skills coming into middle and high school. If a student does not have a firm grasp on advanced math and science concepts, there is a limit on their postsecondary choices, so this tracking ultimately alters a minority student’s postsecondary options (“Factors in K12”, 31).
On top of the uneven tracking of minority students, there is a large void of Advancement Placement (AP) courses available at low-income, heavily minority-serving schools. Many urban schools do not offer advanced courses, meaning that students at that school do not have the opportunity to challenge themselves and prepare themselves for college exams. This, in turn, leads minority students to test lower than their white peers on college placement exams, leading to less post-secondary enrollment. Interestingly enough, even when AP/IB courses are offered as predominantly minority schools, many students choose not to take them because 1) they have been on the remedial track and do not have the knowledge quite yet to wrestle with the rigor of an advanced course and 2) they have not typically been represented in advanced classes. If someone doesn’t see another person like himself or herself in a new situation, they are much less likely to voluntarily enter into that situation. Again, the lack of rigor in their curriculum on the “lower” track leads to less success in college placement exams and, therefore, fewer placements into postsecondary institutions (“Factors in K12”, 32).
In the past 60 years, the United States has come a long ways in our educational system. We are still progressing with initiatives like President Barack Obama’s “White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans”, giving solutions and actions that the White House plans to take to combat the achievement gap in the African American community. Solving the educational disparity for minority students goes beyond the school- it really looks at the socioeconomic issues of these areas as well. However, there are biases and outdated practices that can be addressed in our schools today, and new practices that address the differences in our diverse communities can be employed as well. Are we the Superman that students may need? Not quite, but we are working on it. As a future educator, I hope that I can be an agent of change in this particular area. Someday, education will be the Superman to all of those waiting for be taken far, far away from their current situation and to the dreams that they have been fostering since they were placed in it.
Reference List
Capizzi, C. (2012, May 3). Are Educators Showing A “Positive Bias“ To Minority Students – and Keeping Them From Doing Their Best?. Rutgers Newark. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from http://www.newark.rutgers.edu/news/educators-showing-positive-bias-minority
Fact Sheet. (2009, January 1). African Americans and Education. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from naacp.3cdn.net/e5524b7d7cf40a3578_2rm6bn7vr.pdf
(2011). Factors in K--12 Education That Influence the Success of Racial and Ethnic Minority Students in the STEM Circuit. ASHE Higher Education Report, 36(6), 27-52. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from the EBSCO Host database.
Guggenheim, D. (Director). (2011). Waiting for "Superman" [Documentary]. United States: Paramount Home Entertainment.
Harris, J. L., Kamhi, A. G., & Pollock, K. E. (2000). Literacy in African American communities. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.
Jackson, C. L. (2001). African American education: a reference handbook. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, Inc..
Kunjufu, J. (2002). Black students-Middle class teachers. Chicago, Ill.: African American Images.
Obama, B. (2012, July 26). Executive Order -- White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans. The White House. Retrieved May 6, 2013, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/26/executive-order-white-house-initiative-educational-excellence-african-am
Prendergast, C. (2003). Literacy and racial justice: the politics of learning after Brown v. Board of Education. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Shapiro, T. M. (2004). The hidden cost of being African American: how wealth perpetuates inequality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, W. D., & Chunn, E. W. (1989). Black education: a quest for equity and excellence. New Brunswick, N.J., U.S.A.: Transaction Publishers.
State Comparison. (2008, January 1). United States Education Dashboard. Retrieved May 1, 2013, from http://dashboard.ed.gov/statecomparison.aspx?i=e&id=2&wt=0
Willie, C. V., Garibaldi, A. M., & Reed, W. L. (1991). The Education of African-Americans. New York: Auburn House.