Upon deeper inquiries I have discovered that most public schools in London serve the less fortunate students, students who come from poor households, broken homes, or are considered immigrants/refugees even if they were born in England. The "White flight" of urban cities in America can ring true in the British education system, where the more affluent, Caucasian students are privileged to attend outstanding private schools, while the minority and underprivileged students are corralled into over populated, disinterested academic institutions. I had a 10th grade student in the Fall who was born and raised in England tell me, in his broken English, that he is not British, but Romanian. He lived in England his entire life, but as a result of being placed in all English as a Second language courses throughout his education he can barely speak English, doesn't relate to the British culture and lacks access to necessary Math and Science courses that could lead him on a brighter path. The school placed behaviorally challenged students, many of whom were from African or Caribbean descent, in my ESL class because they "had nowhere else to put them". Instead of these students being mainstreamed with the rest of the English speaking, British born student population, they were segregated in a trailer behind the school for half of their day relearning basic English (from an American) with students who were learning English for the very first time. The school did not want to waste their resources on correcting the misguided behavior, and did not want to invest time into building the students up. I left that school because an administrator would tell the students that they "were animals who deserved to be taught in cages", and make them stand outside in the rain at her mercy. One of the more positive aspects of the British education system is that all public schools are set up and funded similarly, regardless of the location of the school. Primary schools all have Interactive White Boards, laptops, and most have Ipads. The basic foundation gives all children a perceived equal opportunity with similar resources, regardless of their race or socioeconomic standing. This is in direct contrast to the American education system, where much of the school funding comes from property taxes. If the local properties are worthless, then the schools receive less funding, have less resources, and less teachers. Situations like Trenton, NJ happen where the high school is battling relentless mold, asbestos, a caving roof, less than half of the student population is proficient is basic math and the city has the lowest high school graduation rate in New Jersey, despite Trenton being the state capitol. Ten minutes down the road is one of New Jersey's top public school districts, and a high school that is ranked amongst the top in the country. I had the privilege of attending that high school. They offered countless foreign languages, college board approved AP courses, advanced literacy, mathematics and science courses, and many students graduate to become extremely successful in their adulthood, and taking advantage of opportunities (such as myself) to travel the world.
Philadelphia is another example of the perfect storm. The city shut down over 40 public schools in the last few years causing classroom overcrowds, a brain drain of good teachers, little to no resources and under funding for the remaining schools. The students are left with no libraries, no physical education, no AP courses, no advanced classes, and underpaid and angry teachers. The students impacted by this are overwhelmingly minority and poor students, which propagates the racial inequalities in both education and financial.The city of Philadelphia is more interested in investing into a $400 million dollar prison system than educating their youth. All developed nations have issues with their education system, some more than others. China is a great example of inequality amongst Chinese minorities, and the socioeconomic gap between students is just as large compared to their Western counterparts. Just like their democratic friends, China's educational inequality is rooted in educational policies or lack thereof. According to this Oxford Journal, "There is a great disparity in the quantity and quality of education that urban and rural children receive. Moreover, there is inequality in access to education within rural China based mainly on the income and educational attainment of households and on the locality." Quality of education is very important, but when there is no investment in the underprivileged population of any nation then they are locked out of achieving financial success, which in turn makes them a depended on the government. To me, churning out less socially welfare dependent people is more beneficial for a nation's government because it is cheaper, but it seems that no one makes policies keeping the future in mind.
In 2012, the top 1% of US earners collected 19.3% of household income, breaking a record previously set in 1927. The financial inequality, and inadvertently racial inequality is worse now than before the Civil Rights movement. It is worse now than since the Jim Crow laws, which legalized segregation in America. This should be an appalling fact. I came across an article outlining 14 Disturbing Stats About Racial Inequality in American Public Schools. The two facts that stood out the most to me were that "Black students were more than three times as likely to attend schools where fewer than 60 percent of teachers meet all state certification and licensure requirements" and that "Black students were expelled at three times the rate of white students." I have witnessed both of these occurrences. On a weekly basis more than one of my students of color in Philadelphia was suspended; I can say the same for in London as well. Roughly 40% of teachers that I have worked with on three different continents were not certified teachers and gave a sub par performance at best. This New York Times article, "School Data finds Pattern of Inequality Along Racial Lines" further outlines the discrepancies of teacher quality to the student population. They discuss how "black, Latino, American Indian and Native Alaskan students are three times as likely as white students to attend schools with higher concentrations of first-year teachers." First year teachers may exude enthusiasm for their new career, however they typically lack classroom management skills, and the experience that a seasoned teacher brings into the classroom. Also noteworthy, is that via the alternate route program in many American states an individual with any university degree only needs to take a ten month teacher course (and pass the necessary Praxis exams) to become a certified teacher. This is in extreme contrast to other developed nations where individuals are required to take 2 - 4 years of academic courses to become a classroom teacher. One can conclude that first year American teachers, compared to first year teachers in other nations, are not as prepared due to the lack of extensive training and support. The author also points out that teachers who work at a school with a higher concentration of black and Latino students earn at least $5,000 less than their counterparts in a predominantly Caucasian school. British schools have a similar disparity as their teacher pay scale is loosely "suggested" and not often followed as a permanent guideline, but rather is up to the initial negotiations in the job interview between the administration and teacher candidate.
Pennsylvania is trying to combat under qualified educators by only allowing a teacher with a Level I teaching certificate to have 6 years to obtain a Level II teaching certificate, however, after those 6 years if a teacher does not earn a masters degree (which they can't do without going into debt) or hasn't worked at a reputable school they will lose their certification entirely. This goes back to racial and socioeconomic inequality, because if an underpaid urban teacher cannot afford a graduate degree and the schools are too underfunded to assist them, then they will lose their qualifications after six years regardless.
Ironically, this week President Barack Obama and his three predecessors; Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush met at the LBJ Library to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of President Lyndon Johnson signing the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion or gender. George W. Bush, in his eloquently spoken way was quoted as saying, The "soft bigotry of low expectations strips disadvantaged students of a strong education." This is a bit impudent coming from the man who proposed and signed into law the "No Child Left Behind Act", which directly correlates to the increase of falsified records, No Fail policies and lack of quality education in exchange for "teaching to the test". Low expectations were further engrained in schools serving minorities as a direct result to his educational policies. As mediocre and failing schools faced losing government funding they implemented No Fail policies creating massive grade inflation and falsifying standardized test scores. In inner cities across America there are illiterate, below grade level students with 3.0 - 4.0 GPAs, regardless of if they passed a single test or turned in a single assignment. Many of these schools only have an A, B and C system, where a D or an F isn't even in the system for report cards. Arguably, these young adults could then become a burden on society or incarcerated and help generate a profit for the for-profit prison systems. As Bush was criticized for his brain child law, he replied it "eventually requires adjustment" and "No law is perfect". Twelve years after the law took effect there are still large gaps in education between whites and minorities and increased efforts to privatize public school systems. This farcical law has unfortunately been adopted in countries such as Canada and England, where students equally do not fear the idea of failing, and will just be pushed into the next grade until they age out of public school and become the problem of someone else, i.e society.
What do the U.S., China Serbia and Rwanda have in common?
Income inequality!
The U.S. ranks closer to China, Serbia and Rwanda than any other country in the developed world when it comes to income inequality.
"Everything in America is so stratified by class now. We have the 93rd level of income inequality in the world. You're already seeing highway lanes that are for pay and ones that aren't." Adam McKay, American screenwriter, director, comedian, and actor.
Has the Civil Rights Act actually accomplished anything within the 50 years that it has been signed?
