… on the disparity of education resources accessible to low-income students.

For students having access to needed information on class curriculum, text breakdowns, online sites access or even group discussions are all great contributions for an optimal performance at school. However, this is not the situation for all students. 

There have been many studies regarding the income disparity among students & how this affects their overall performance levels at their various schools. Even at schools noted for their great performances or for having access to the needed tools for studies there is a great gap when students’ incomes are compared. It is a fact that educational resources for low-income students are not as available as for high-income students. This paper explores innovative alternatives to address this disparity and ensure equitable access to resources, examining what can be done by schools, parents, government, and the community.

Sean F. Reardon, a Professor of Education & Sociology at Stanford wrote a thought provoking article in the New York Times called ‘No Rich Left Behind’. The article is based on the startling discovery he found on a study he had done with his students on educational disparities.

Reardon found that the gap of educational successes between high & low income students have grown substantially, with the former doing better than the latter. He was surprised at this because records have always shown that though lacking financially low income students have always been able to compete with those with higher incomes. However, within the last 30 years this seems to have changed.

He delved further & found that what has changed to stimulate this success in the high income students is the areas where their parents are investing their money. Before education did not seem to be a priority for this elite group but now with the changing economic situation where even college graduates have to compete in the job market, education has become a big stake for the wealthy. With this, Reardon discovered that the rich are investing heavily into early cognitive development of their children. 

With this discovery Reardon believes that all stakeholders need to change their perspectives when strategizing on lessening the income gap of the rich versus the poor. Because while the rich has indeed been getting richer, the new gap where their performance in education is also leaving low income students behind indicates a great shift in society. Thus, new strategies to be invented or updated to fit this shift to ensure low income students are not completely left without a voice in a constantly changing system. 

Susan Dynarski & Katherine Michelmore in the article, ‘Income Differences in Education; The Gap within the Gap’, agree with Reardon on the increasing gap where the educational performance of the rich have been getting better & better. In their study, student poverty was measured by who may or may not qualify for subsidized school lunches. This was compared for a number of years against the academic performances of the students. They found that students who have been eligible for subsidized meals for years versus those who have had subsidized meals a few times or not at all, perform poorly.

It should be noted that those who do not qualify for subsidized meals fall within a high income gap that makes subsidized meals unneeded. Thus, coming to the conclusion that the poor students perform badly at school, even within the same school where subsidized students are few, while rich students academic performances have become increasingly better. These results do show the linear relationship between educational resources & the improving academic results.

Of course, getting access to these resources is not all that money can help with. Money can also help with car rides when students are taking extracurricular classes but the parent(s) has to work late & cannot accommodate such classes; or parent is unable to afford needed sport tools or educational tools that go with the extracurricular activity that the student is involved in, making them have to drop it for a less expensive option or just not partake in extracurricular at all. Unfortunately, these are real life cases of many of our students in America due to limited funds.

Reardon had suggested that stakeholders should focus more on early childcare to improve on the cognition of students early on in life as the rich appear to be doing now. This can prove to be a great direction for schools & other stakeholders to take as the focus on early childcare can create a steady foundation that can later be built upon. The issue is still on the financing however, as parents & the selected schools though subsidized still need to make contributions to such a venture. Thus, Reardon had to acknowledge that while the wealthy have the ability to spend to improve their children’s cognition, the poor will still be limited in their capacity to access certain tools to do so. Even so, he also indicated that a;ternatives can always be sought towards such a venture to help the student gap.

Workable solutions to the Disparity

Though involvement in the finances of parents is more a generation’s work, much can be done to improve other areas such as knowledge, critical thinking, advocacy etc. to better improve their overall potential of students. If not comparable to those used by the rich, it can still prove a step forward in improving the chances of their children before they enter the job market.

To understand what Reardon meant with cognitive development we need to go back to Jean Piaget & Lev Vygotsky’s theories. Cognitive development is basically where certain techniques are employed to train the thinking ability of children. It helps them to improve on their reasoning skills, solve problems as well as understand what’s happening around them. These are old concepts practiced in schools but with the new age of technologies compounded with explorations into brain & neuro science, they have taken on new meaning & new avenues for growth for the rich.

However, though the concepts initiated by Paget & Vygotsky are practised there are differences in schools on how they are fully realized. This mostly relates to the funding of the schools but it really depends on the teachers within those schools, the teachers who have been expertly trained accordingly to better stimulate young minds positively.Those with specialized training according to the Montessori & Reggio Emilia approach are particularly sought after with high salary offers by elite schools. Both these teaching methods have some basis in Paget & Vygotsky but they align with modern culture & technology to educate children without keeping them in a box.

 While in certain schools, the teachers have the heart to work with the students but are limited due to limited pay & other factors that force them out of the industry altogether but to high income schools. In an article within the Learning Policy Institute site, “Research indicates that 90% of annual teacher vacancies result from teachers leaving the profession, often due to low salaries, difficult working conditions, and inadequate support. Teachers without full preparation leave at 2 to 3 times the rate of those who are fully prepared.”

Funding is one matter & Teacher training is another. The article goes on to share that California & Mississippi had initiated Teacher Residency programs to invite more teachers, educate & also help with retention. Thus far, reports show that the initiative has been positive with less leaving the industry & an increase in pay. This gives confidence to the teachers while bolstering the future population. It also helps to remember that a positive thinking teacher will be better than a negative one considering the huge influence they have on students’ minds.

However, the issue of where those teachers go will still depend on the economic situations of the schools. Low income schools depend on the governing bodies for all funding needs which limits them but there are always alternatives to be taken where schools, local communities take charge of the professional development of their staff through available seminars or school funded sessions. This can be for a small body which is then taught to the wider school staff. This cannot help with the salaries of the teachers but it allows teachers to have access to the same implementation strategies available to staff of higher income schools. This not only improves the professional capability of the staff themselves but adds to their students & then the schools. 

Parents & students too need to be conscious of improving their knowledge so as to better prepare themselves for such situations of policy change or societal change like what Reardon had indicated. It was debated that all forms of education need to start from the home. From Karris Cooper & Kitty Stewart in the ‘Does Household Income Affect Children’s Outcome’, the home is emphasized as the beginning of education for students & also where students gain their respect & understanding of it. In Cooper & Stewart’s paper the family stress model was given as a reason why some students are unable to compete at school. This model holds that the economic disadvantage of the parents puts a strain on interactions in the home, which can directly affect the schooling of students.

“Economic stress can make parents frustrated, less patient * lacking in the emotional resources needed for supportive & nurturing parenting behaviors.” (Cooper & Stewart, )

Their report showed that external factors can affect the mindset for students thus affecting their overall performances. With better coping methods in play at the early stages as discussed earlier, on cognition development, students would be better able to tackle any destabilizing factors within their home or school. The investment model of Cooper & Stewart also re-enforces that money gives families the confidence to invest in their children with needed “goods that children need to thrive”. 

In the low-income homes it can be understood that parents do not have that confidence & thus, in most cases do not take an active part in their children’s school pursuits. In the article ‘Towards Social Justice & Equity in English as an Additional Language Policies; The Agency of Immigrant Parents in language policy advocacy in Alberta schools’, by Y. Guoy found that immigrant parents took part in workshops & other activities to improve their English so they can better advocate for their children. With their involvement students have a trusted model to follow that they see everyday & do learn from- good or bad.

‘Teaching about Language, Power, & Text: A Review of Classroom Practices that Support Critical Literacy’ by Edward H. Behrman. Found in JSTOR. According to Behrman, Critical Literacy is a necessary tool in the classroom in order to develop the critical thinking of students, particularly in regard to the efficient use of language for social justice. He believes that making students aware early on of the power of their speech allows them to treasure this tool & use it to better the circumstances of themselves, parents & peers.

Behrman had stipulated that language is inherently linked to the power dynamics within society thus the use of critical literacy in the classroom is an advantage for students. If used as described by Behrman, critical literacy has the potential to make students not only be aware of the power of their words but also how to use it. This paper focuses on the little resources available to low income students which limits their ability to compete in the educational sphere thus affecting their development overall- affecting society’s progress.

Instead of accepting that they are at the bottom of the totem pole this enables students to be their own agents of change.

Behrman’s critical literacy theory to help parents & students, even the teachers, can be used within the classrooms to assist with this strategy of overall elevation of everyone’s cognition. This will facilitate critical thinking & the students’ learning, whether at home or the school, will be more homogenous with the staff  & parents working together & the goal being their studies, mental & social development. The goal should never be simply test scores.

Conclusion

Educator Bettina Love stated that “theory does not solve issues – only action and solidarity can do that – but theory gives you language to fight, knowledge to stand on, and a humbling reality of what intersectional social justice is up against.”

Low income students are indeed limited from access to the educational resources needed to make them competitive, that is true, but in some cases a long term approach is needed where schools, communities, parents take stock of what is needed to make their students competitive, foster the right attitude & bit by bit continue to that end. Funding limits but it does not stop progress.

References

• “Addressing Teacher Shortages: Insights from Four States.” Learning Policy Institute, 27 Mar. 2025, learningpolicyinstitute.org/blog/addressing-teacher-shortages-insights-four-states#:~:text=Schools%20serving%20more%20students%20of,retain%20certified%20and%20experienced%20educators. 
• “Ami Montessori Course: Association Montessori International USA.” Association Montessori International/USA, 29 Jan. 2025, amiusa.org/about/montessori-philosophy/. 
• Behrman, Edward H. “Teaching about Language, Power, and Text: A Review of Classroom Practices That Support Critical Literacy.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, vol. 49, no. 6, 2006, pp. 490–98. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40017606. 
• Deardorff, Julie. “Abolitionist Teaching: A Conversation with Bettina L. Love.” School of Education and Social Policy – Northwestern University, sesp.northwestern.edu/news-events/sesp-news/2021/abolitionist-teaching-a-conversation-with-bettina-l-love.html. 
• Michelmore, K., & Dynarski, S. “The Gap Within the Gap: Using Longitudinal Data to Understand Income Differences in Educational Outcomes.” AERA Open, 3(1), 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417692958
• Reardon, Sean F. “No Rich Child Left Behind.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 Apr. 2013, archive.nytimes.com/opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/27/no-rich-child-left-behind/. 
• Stewart, Kerris Cooper & Kitty. “Does Household Income Affect Children’s Outcomes? A SYSTEMAT.” Child Indicators Research, Springer & The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), 1 Jan. 1970, ideas.repec.org/a/spr/chinre/v14y2021i3d10.1007_s12187-020-09782-0.html. 

• “Tet Triumph: Transform Your Teaching Dreams Into Reality!” Free AI & Learning Courses Online in USA Global English & Hindi, AskTenali.com, asktenali.com/tet-triumph-transform-your-teaching-dreams-into-reality. 
• “The Connection between Play and Learning in Childhood.” Kids First, www.kidsfirstservices.com/first-insights/the-connection-between-play-and-learning-in-childhood.