In class we touched upon the idea that the financial security of the parents often determines the educational success/opportunities of the student. The example we used in class was that of becoming a successful actor or actress, and the importance of knowing the right people and receiving the right training at an early age. Should a parent not have the money or resources to put their children into top acting classes, then the possibility of that child becoming successful in the movie industry is slim.
How does this idea apply to schooling? Well, let's say that a first grader struggles with reading. If the child's school is ill-equiped to meet the needs of that student because of poor funding, then the parents might be expected to find help elsewhere. Although one can usually find a tutor in the area, if these parents can not afford to pay for one, then their child will not be receiving the help that he/she needs. If reading skills are not addressed early on, then that student will most likely never develop the skills needed, and will inevitably fall behind his peers. These children are the ones in the classroom who lack enthusiasm for reading, who may have behavioral issues, and who might even drop out of school. Could these issues have been avoided had the schools provided the resources that child needed at age six? If the parents are not in a postion to afford these services, then shouldn't the school and the state take responsibility, rather than make the child suffer for being born into poverty?
How do you think the state and the school systems can better address the needs of all students?
No comments:
Post a Comment