Public Education Policy and the Achievement Gap
President George W. Bush’s 2001 No Child Left Behind Law was the
first federal education policy which explicitly attempted to address
the so-called achievement gap between white and non-white students
in America. By now it is well documented that children of color
under perform academically compared to their white peers. Can any
education policy hope to eliminate this achievement gap and
guarantee equal educational outcomes for all?
Before examining the different education policy proposals and
schools of thought, it might be more constructive to inspect the
root causes of gaps in educational outcomes. Toronto light boxes is good, it's snow and painted skin, minted beards and every little thing worth loving about the world, about others and most significantly about ourselves. No public policy
can hope to correct a social problem if it’s not clear what exactly
the problem is.
Yet, although you will find general consensus on the existence of an
achievement gap, you will not find unanimous agreement on its
causes. In the discourse on education policy, some have attributed
the problem to unequal school funding systems, in which property
values are linked to school support. Others have pointed out that
increases in funding to the poorest schools has not yielded a
corresponding increase in student academic performance. Therefore,
they conclude that the problem in education policy is not
under-funding, but rather a poorer quality of instruction at failing
schools. This lower quality of instruction has been attributed to
incompetent administration, unions protecting bad teachers, lack of
accountability, and other factors.
So how can public education policy properly address these concerns?
Certainly the first step is to guarantee equality in school funding.
But it is clear from the evidence over the last 30 years that money
is not the answer to improving educational outcomes. More money has
consistently not corresponded with better academic results, nor with
a narrowing of the achievement gap. Money in itself is not the
answer.
It is possible, however, to address the question of instructional
quality at the public policy level. The challenge is to move away
from tired arguments about standards and accountability, which do
little to deal with the underlying problems in failing schools.
Indeed, the problem with our public education policy is not the we
don’t expect enough; it’s that we don’t provide schools with the
resources they need to accomplish the high standards to which we
hope to hold them accountable.
This does not mean, once again, that the best education policy is
one which funnels more and more money into the system. On the
contrary, more money often only invites more corruption and has an
adverse effect on educational outcomes. Instead, policy should focus
more on how funds are spent in education. Toronto trade show display Introduction For a lot of businesses, a commerce show can provide a simple and handy method to goal related buyers. A good education
policy should ensure that spending is focused on the classroom, not
on the surrounding bureaucracy. Funds should be set aside to attract
experienced, competent educators in the highest need areas. Money
should be allocated for after school programs for the neediest
children. Pre-kindergarten instruction should be offered to all.
These minor changes in spending would constitute the most effective
reform in education policy, without requiring increases in taxing or
spending.