A great number of people no matter race or income level will agree that higher education is important to achieve. However, something happens to students during their general education years that leads to underrepresentation in colleges throughout the nation. The effects of their community’s general income level have a significant effect on the chances they will go into college and successfully complete. Low income students are faced with barriers that are out of their hand to control. Government funded programs have taken initiative but their selectivity doesn’t provide equality for all students and parents with low income tend to be undereducated in matters of understanding university.
A high number of low income students tend to be minorities like Latino and African American that are concentrated in poverty level neighborhoods. The amount of rigorous coursework that university’s look is limited when it comes to underfunded school. The lack of a variety of AP courses or educational programs is out of hands for students. Which I turn look lacking when the universities look at their applications. There’s a lack of exposure to colleges and the process of admission to both students and parents, limiting the options of the future for many. This is the modern version of Brown v. Board of Education only it’s not by race but by income level.
Nearly 60 years after the fight of racially segregated schools came to an end, legally, the micro issues within education are rising. The way certain neighborhoods are flourishing with top quality schools and other barely meeting the standards. Problems with college information and college preparation courses like AP and Avid are cut from a school’s curriculum. The are other ways in which we are keeping the same routine and underlying problems afloat. In a study looking at the influence of Brown v. Board it found that “Students of color are disproportionately likely to find themselves in poorly funded schools with few facilities and resources or assigned to non-college preparatory courses of studies” (Zirkel and Cantor). The result of tracking systems within schools preparing students for the workforce rather than higher education. This is continuing the cycle of simply low wage work opportunities for high school graduates with basic educational qualities. Leading them to live in low income neighborhoods with their growing families and putting their kids in the same system with underfunded schools.
When looking at the number of minorities graduating from colleges there is a significant improvement. However, when looking at the numbers as a whole we are still falling behind significantly. For example “college graduation rates show that marked differences exist in the rates at which African American and Hispanic students complete college as compared to their Caucasian counterparts, with African Americans and Hispanics requiring more time to complete an undergraduate degree” (Ward). It is one thing to get into a four year university because of excelling in an under resourced school only to find that you are still severely underprepared. Students are robbed from the attention needed to help them succeed as they move on. Furthermore, those in an low income situation are faced with the unavailability to seek outside sources that may require for them to put out more money. Sources like outside tutoring are not an option available when they might need it the most. In extreme situations classrooms are overcrowded and supplies are not available to meet the demand for a comfortable and healthy learning environment. Students cannot excel in classes they are being set up fail.
In addition to the general lack of resources from public schools an increasing factor limiting the access to higher education is the increasing tuition. With tuition spikes increasing a rough average of 2% every coming year, the likelihood of college for those without access to financial aid or parental support is diminishing. In the graph below we see the increase in public and private four year universities.
SOURCES: College Board, Annual Survey of Colleges; NCES, IPEDS Fall Enrollment data.
In a way accessing higher education is really a luxury. These cost only include that of tuition, room and board are additional costs yet to be taken into account along with other basic needs. Which leads into more low income minorities going into two year community colleges rather than four year.
The issue is not community colleges they are a great start for higher education, but it strengthens the segregation on campuses. Additionally, the likelihood of someone completing community college as compared to four year university is small. In an article “Improving Opportunity for Low Income Students” by Engberg and Allen, they state that “Low income students are associated with lower expectations about education attainment and take college entrance examination less frequently” (Engberg and Allen, 787). It all still points back to the school available resources and spread of knowledge on such matters. For example, providing information about waivers for exams like the SAT or ACT could increase the likelihood of more students taking the test. Furthermore, it’s in the school enjoinment of expectations that also need to be raised. Having a college driven environment in low income schools can impact a student’s view of their purpose and future goals.
In order to combat the issues in low funded schools the government has started a variety of programs to gear students toward the goal of higher education. Specifically, programs lie TRIO which are meant to “improve access on the part of low-income and racial and ethnic minority students into institutions of higher education” (Ward, 56) have been taking initiative to reach out. These programs are implanted at the start of one’s high school career and carried out until the start of college. The program is taking the part of the schools and reaching out and educating students and parents on a higher education in low income communities. Programs like a six week summer course are implanting the rigorous course work that the regular school lacks. These are great starts in mending the gap of quality education but they also have their limits. For example , Upward Bound part of the TRIO initiative is selective of those who participate in the programs and have certain criteria. Which is okay but limits those in need of the exposure to these resources. The option areas out there and does require initiative from students to try and participate however, what happens when there isn’t enough exposure. Occasionally these programs do require effort outside of school, being low income often times students hold part times jobs limiting their availability.
There is a common theme of seeing higher education as a way out of poverty for low income students. Many don’t see that the institutions available to them are the ones that are blocking their road to achieving that dream. Not only that but no matter how much you try the system is set against you. In a research by Simon Marginson notes that “poor kids who succeed academically are less likely to graduate from college than richer kids who do worse in school” (Marginson 179). It all points back to how your general education prepared you and helped. Being the top in one of the worst schools can make you average in properly funded ones.
In essence, accessibility to a higher education is being effected by the income level of the community. An issue completely out of hands from the students receiving the education and an issue that shouldn’t be having an effect on the quality of education a student is receiving. Stemming back to before when Brown v. Board of Education had taken place the quality and equality of education is still being unevenly distributed among peers. Ultimately affecting those in a low-income situation ending in the same cycle that they were brought up into. Widening resources and programs is a great start but the solution needs to be more inclusive of everyone in order to achieve equality to higher education.