Poor Neighborhoods, Quality of Schools, and Social Mobility Research Paper

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Made by Human No AI

Introduction

Low-income neighborhoods are characterized by poor quality schools, which impede the residents’ upward mobility. Impoverished suburbs where people of low socioeconomic strata live provide limited room and opportunities for people to succeed. The neighborhood contexts engender notable disparities regarding the quality of schools, which in turn impact academic attainment, and ultimately, the social mobility of the residents. This implies that educational institutions situated in a predominantly disadvantaged community are highly likely to be understaffed, have fewer experienced teachers, and are contextually within a social climate which does not prioritize education. This paper hypothesizes that the quality of schools in poor neighborhoods is worse than those in affluent areas, which limits people in underprivileged areas to succeed.

Study Question: Is the quality of schools, social mobility, and differential treatment of children worse in disadvantaged neighborhoods compared to those in affluent areas?

Literature Review

Numerous studies have explored the intricate relationship between the neighborhoods’ levels of income and the quality of schools. The results of various surveys demonstrate a robust association between an area’s economic standards and the conditions of the academic institutions. According to Nieuwenhuis and Hooimeijer (2016), the neighborhood context is inextricably linked with the various aspects which influence the levels of learning institutions. The environmental or situational impacts are dependent on the causal process of interaction and mediation. This perspective is corroborated by Quillian (2017), who asserts that neighborhoods are a fundamental source of advantages or detriments for the residents. In this regard, the community’s context or environment engenders disparities in access to low or high-quality schools. This implies that environmental factors, particularly regarding residents’ economic well-being, amplify or ameliorate the social mechanisms and contextual effects of a neighborhood. For instance, disadvantaged environs are socially disorganized and have an unfavorable educational climate, which adversely affects curriculum, teaching, management, and efficiency.

Additionally, neighborhood poverty impairs a community’s ability to augment governmental support for educational institutions and compensate for the gaps in policy, finances, or infrastructure. Owens (2017) contends that low-income societies have limited social and economic resources to improve or enhance any particular aspect of academic institutions. The affluent environs are inhabited by residents with the financial ability to incentivize the recruitment of credentialed teachers, mitigate understaffing through privately engaged tutors, and offer additional support for the improvement of schools’ effectiveness. Moreover, the learning environment of the schools in poor neighborhoods is detrimentally affected by the generally noisy environment due to inadequate provisions for academic institutions in the physical planning of the areas (Wodtke & Parbst, 2017). Such environs are characterized by negative attitudes towards education, which limits the community’s willingness to invest in schools, eroding the standards of such institutions.

Education ranks among the strongest drivers of upward social mobility. It can reduce poverty levels, enhance growth and prosperity, and eliminate inequalities in society. Hoskins and Barker (2018) posit that, in modern knowledge-based economies and societies, education plays an integral and decisive role in expanding access to opportunities, work, better income, and social security. This view is underscored by Owens and de St Croix (2020), who argue that exposure to high-quality academics improves a person’s ability to overcome systemic and structural disadvantages, promoting their economic well-being. This implies that educational poverty, an aspect of inequality in academic conditions and standards, impedes upward social mobility. Since the standard and quality of schools are arguably a major component of the environment, disparities in income levels significantly obstruct residents of poor neighborhoods from transcending social stratification. In this regard, disadvantaged environs engender limited mobility and entrench the inability of the people to improve their economic well-being.

Additionally, the quality of education institutions stimulates equality in ways that facilitate upward social mobility. It makes the likelihood and realization of low poverty and high incomes in the future much greater. However, in poor neighborhoods, this is hampered by numerous factors, including high incidences of dropout, unfavorable social environment, and low quality of teachers (Dagnew, 2017). Lee-St. John et al. (2018) contend that the propensity to abandon studies is disproportionately high in poor neighborhoods than in affluent environs. In this regard, upward social mobility in low-income localities is obstructed by substandard schools, contributing to the perpetuation of economic inequalities.

Children in poor environs are also treated differently from those in Middle-Class localities. Notably, neighborhoods are contextual social environments where children experience life alongside its risks, opportunities, and resources. In this regard, students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds and localities face numerous forms of discriminatory treatment. For instance, the credentialed and highly qualified teachers in wealthy communities are concerned with the overall well-being of learners and are unlikely to subject them to potentially uncomfortable situations, such as overcrowded and congested classrooms. Indeed, the specific skills of the teachers indicate their ability to deliver quality instructional material and content more effectively due to the high social value of education. Similarly, understaffing in such learning institutions diminishes the tutors’ ability to provide individualized attention and follow-ups. This implies that the generally poor communal attitude towards education adversely affects the teachers’ willingness to ensure learners’ academic excellence. From this dimension, children from low-income neighborhoods are treated differently from those in affluent Middle-Class localities.

Hypothesis

The economic well-being of a neighborhood directly influences the quality of academic institutions in a given area. This paper hypothesizes that poor communities have schools of lower standards than those in affluent localities. The other hypothesis is that children in disadvantaged zones are treated differently from those in wealthy suburbs. Additionally, the quality of schools in impoverished localities impedes the students’ upward social mobility compared to those from Middle-Income neighborhoods. Overall, the paper hypothesizes that disadvantaged areas have substandard schools, which impairs learners’ ability to advance and move upwards in the social stratification structures and contributes to differential treatment.

Sample, Instruments, and Data Analysis

This study analyses an anonymized individual data set from public schools in both affluent and underprivileged neighborhoods. During the study, the regions were categorized as wealthy or disadvantaged depending on family incomes in the geographical locations. Other comparisons were drawn regarding how the residents privately support the schools in the two regions. Additional information obtained pertained to the number of credentialed teachers working in each of the localities, their level of competence, students’ dropout ratio, and differential treatment extended to learners. The statistical analysis demonstrated that disadvantaged neighborhoods are populated with low-quality schools due to poor teacher-student ratio, congested and overcrowded classrooms. All the teachers in the wealthy regions were credentialed, highly skilled, willing to provide individualized attention to learners, and equipped with facilitative advantages, such as up-to-date textbooks. Students in poor neighborhoods use dilapidated facilities and have higher levels of dropout incidences than their wealthy counterparts. This limits their access to opportunities, higher-paying jobs, and social security.

The Future of Children From Disadvantaged Neighborhoods

Accomplishments in adulthood are primarily influenced by conditions in which individuals spent their childhood. The stress and strain occasioned by poor nutrition, social networks, housing conditions, and the general neighborhood status has significant effect on a child’s cognitive and physical wellbeing, impacting their desire and motivation to study (Chaudry & Wimer, 2016). This adversely impacts the youngsters’ ability to register positive outcomes in later years. In this regard, children who grow up in poverty are less likely to achieve significant milestones in their adulthood compared to their counterparts in affluent neighborhoods. For instance, these children are predisposed to joblessness and earning less in the future (Alvarado, 2018). This implies that the socio-environmental conditions of a neighborhood determine the overall chances of adulthood success. Therefore, children from underprivileged areas register low accomplishments in their later years.

Interventions and Solutions for Changing the Situation

Various interventions can be implemented to improve the quality of schools in poor neighborhoods and minimize student attrition. For instance, school funding should reflect the local community’s levels of need, and more efforts should be channeled towards ensuring that the appropriate teacher-student ratio is achieved. Additionally, all teachers should have minimum requirements whose remuneration should be standardized to ensure that schools in the affluent neighborhoods do not poach or attract the best in the industry. A special fund should be established to support schools’ infrastructural needs and assist needy students in minimizing dropout rates. Policymakers should also consider reorganizing the schools to integrate better managerial practices to minimize academic attainment disparities. Moreover, community outreach campaigns and programs should be conducted to sensitize the public in poor neighborhoods about the essence of education to improve their perception and image of schools.

Conclusion

The neighborhood is a fundamental contextual factor with a direct influence on the quality of schools. Wealthy localities can enhance various aspects of learning institutions, such as privately engaging teachers to address understaffing and contribute funds to improve school infrastructure. Moreover, these schools attract credentialed and highly experienced personnel, which cumulatively promote the quality of such schools. However, poor neighborhoods cannot implement some of these interventions due to the socioeconomic context, which keeps schools’ quality in these areas low. This contributes to high student dropout rates and limits the learners’ upward social mobility.

References

Alvarado, S. (2018). The impact of childhood neighborhood disadvantage on adult joblessness and income. Social Science Research, 70, 1-17. Web.

Chaudry, A., & Wimer, C. (2016). Poverty is not just an indicator: The relationship between income, poverty, and child well-being. Academic Pediatrics, 16(3), S23–S29. Web.

Dagnew, A. (2017).African Educational Research Journal, 5(3), 186–193. Web.

Hoskins, K., & Barker, B. (2018). Social mobility: The potential of a genealogical approach. British Educational Research Journal, 45(2), 238–253. Web.

Lee-St. John, T., Walsh, M., Raczek, A., Vuilleumier, C., Foley, C., Heberle, A…& Dearing, E. (2018). The long-term impact of systemic student support in elementary school: Reducing high school dropout. AERA Open, 4(4), 1-16. Web.

Nieuwenhuis, J., & Hooimeijer, P. (2016). The association between neighborhoods and educational achievement, a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 31(2), 321–347. Web.

Owens, A. (2017). Income segregation between school districts and inequality in students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 91(1), 1–27. Web.

Owens, J., & de St Croix, T. (2020). Engines of social mobility? Navigating meritocratic education discourse in an unequal society. British Journal of Educational Studies, 68(4), 403-424. Web.

Quillian, L. (2017). Focus, 33(2), 22–28. Web.

Wodtke, G., & Parbst, M. (2017). Neighborhoods, schools, and academic achievement: A formal mediation analysis of contextual effects on reading and mathematics abilities. Demography, 54(5), 1653–1676. Web.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, October 2). Poor Neighborhoods, Quality of Schools, and Social Mobility. https://ivypanda.com/essays/poor-neighborhoods-quality-of-schools-and-social-mobility/

Work Cited

"Poor Neighborhoods, Quality of Schools, and Social Mobility." IvyPanda, 2 Oct. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/poor-neighborhoods-quality-of-schools-and-social-mobility/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'Poor Neighborhoods, Quality of Schools, and Social Mobility'. 2 October.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "Poor Neighborhoods, Quality of Schools, and Social Mobility." October 2, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/poor-neighborhoods-quality-of-schools-and-social-mobility/.

1. IvyPanda. "Poor Neighborhoods, Quality of Schools, and Social Mobility." October 2, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/poor-neighborhoods-quality-of-schools-and-social-mobility/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Poor Neighborhoods, Quality of Schools, and Social Mobility." October 2, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/poor-neighborhoods-quality-of-schools-and-social-mobility/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only quilified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment
1 / 1