Schools in Low Socio Economic Status Communities - Example

Name : xxxxxxxxxxx Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxx Title : Schools in low socio economic status communities Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx @2010 Schools in low socio economic status communities Introduction The main focus of New South Wales Department of Education and Training is to change the miner in which schooling takes. The key objectives include, attracting high performing principals as well as teachers to low socioeconomic status communities, improving the performance management policies in addition to procedures within the schools in low SES communities. There are also implementation partnerships with the parents, other schools, businesses and societies in order to provide and be able to access extended services. The aim of the essay is to find out how low socio economic status can affect students’ life after school, and at the same time, whet the New South Wales Department of Education and Training is doing to help them. (Thomas 2006). In several schools, the head principals and the teachers normally have innovative ideas on how to improve the educational results of their students that could be employed given further support. It is apparent that the best results are attained when principals work jointly with their communities to develop a shared ownership and responsibility to handle local matters and dedicate time and energy to leading teachers in adopting the most efficient teaching strategies (Thomas 2006). The socioeconomic status of a family is based on the income of the family, the educational level and occupation of the parents/guardians as well as the socio status within the community. Families having a high socioeconomic status normally are considered to be more effective in preparing their children for school since they typically have the ability to access numerous resources for promoting and supporting the development of children. They are in a position of offering their children with high quality care, reading material as well as toys in order to encourage the children in a variety of learning activities. Furthermore, families with high socio economic status can easily access information concerning the health of their children, in addition to social, emotional as well as cognitive development. Moreover, such families regularly seek out information to assist to prepare their children better for life after school (William 2008). The isolating nature of social class, ethnicity, as well as race can well decrease several enriching experiences through to be important for learning as well as the experiences thought to be prerequisite for preparing the children after school. Social class, ethnicity in addition to race consist of “contextual givens” that establish locality, housing, accessibility to resources that influence enrichment or deficiency and also the possession of specific value systems (Beilharz 2007). There is a big disparity between the schools in high SES and low SES communities and the differences include; the size of the classes, quality of teachers, availability of resources, facilities and the neighborhoods as well. The disparities can be computed from schools to schools within a region. Basically, resources in a school play a key role within school level disparities. The resources within a school come from various sources, for example federal, state or local funding. Federal government offers about 9% of education funding, the state offers around 47% while the local schools district offers about 44% of education funding. Generally, the federal funding does not have a major impact in bringing on the inequality: this is mainly as a result of local and state funding (Noga 2009). State funding is normally distributed through a formula and most of the states use the funding formulas that offer funding basing on the total sum of the student within a district. Some formulas are subjective to varying factors, for instance the number of disabled students, the number of student coming from poor families or the total number of students whose English is a second language. In some states, the formula is computed to allow states with low local funding to get more money; these areas are mostly higher poverty areas. On the local level, what supports most of the funding the local government offers in education are the property taxes? Here, the local governments gather taxes from taxable properties as direct proceeds for the local school district (Beilharz 2007). This means that students living in low socioeconomic status communities with the greatest needs attend the schools having the least resources, the least qualified teachers and schools having substandard resources and facilities. As a result, schools in high socioeconomic status have a high probability of offering their students a better learning environment than the schools in low socioeconomic status areas since these schools will focus more on the security and not education (Yogesh 2007). Schools located in high socioeconomic localities are able to invest their finances in student education through equipping their classes with enhanced and better educational or improving their science laboratories or performing art centers. On the other hand, schools from low socioeconomic status communities are more likely to spend their share of finances by financing their basic repair, for instance, roofing or asbestos removal. The difference is how finances are spent; while the other schools are using their funding in equipping their institutions with the most recent technology, the poor schools struggle to keep their students dry (Levitas 2006). Schools from low socioeconomic status communities also have low quality teachers. This is because the rich areas are able to attract the most qualified teachers to their schools. Schools from poor regions are not able to pay the high salaries and also are not in a position to offer the best teachers the high standards they are offered by schools in high socioeconomic level areas. Experience is also a major contributory factor whereby teachers are supposed to bring out the best in children but without proper experience some children may lag behind. The turn out rate of the teachers also affects the quality of education that is provided. Class as well as socioeconomic status is another key factor between the schools (Beilharz 2007). The New South Wales Department of Education and Training has a program that works towards improving the participation of students from low socio economic status in education. The program aims at adopting strategies that can improve students’ life in school, in the family and in their communities. The policies of the program state that, schools can help the students by improving their participation in genuine and significant learning issues which may also help them after school. Students from low socio economic background can be involved in decision making, leading classroom activities and also local community activities that are done through the school (New South Wales Department of Education and Training 2010). Equity in education participation is ensured through the Priority School Funding Program (PSFP) which has taken up the main role in uplifting the participation of students from low socio economic status. In this program, the school, teachers, parents and the community are the main players. The school has several roles that include developing a culture of achievement by persistently focusing on learning, having targets towards improving students’ participation and engagement. On the other hand, the teacher has his own roles which include adopting teaching strategies which will promote a positive learning culture for students’ participation in high quality learning. The teachers also offer models of quality work so that students can have an understanding of what quality is in education. Teachers also develop initiatives between the students and members of community that may support students’ participation in learning (Beilharz 2007). The reforms should be able to offer more funding and higher discretion to the principals and local school communities as well. This will assist such schools in attracting high-performing teachers in addition to principals and recompense them for their success. Teaching within a disadvantaged region is one of the most significant vocations within the state. It is therefore necessary to make sure that more talented youthful citizens select teaching in future and establish incentives for them to work within the nation’s most needy schools (Levitas 2006). Using the low socioeconomic status reforms, the schools should be flexible enough to assist students through after-school study support, new sporting programs, well-built networks with the local community and ensuring that the schools have connections with local businesses. Private schools from high socioeconomic status levels have for a long time offered such programs to their students and this apparently helps the students a lot after they leave school (Yogesh 2007). Conclusion In conclusion, the strategies the program by New South Wales Department of Education and Training should apply to come up with successful reforms in areas within low socioeconomic levels include; incentives to encourage and attract high performing teachers and principals, adopting the best practice performance management and staffing measures that articulate a comprehensible task for principals, school operations planning and arrangements that encourage both innovation and flexibility, providing innovative as well as tailored learning opportunities, reinforced school responsibility and availing improved external partnerships (Beilharz 2007). Bibliography Beilharz, P., 2007, 'Social democracy and social justice', Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, Vol, 25/1. Levitas, R., 2006, The concept of social exclusion and the new Durkheimian hegemony', Critical Social Policy, Vol.16/1. Lingard, B., 2005, 'The disadvantaged schools programme: caught between literacy and local management of schools', International Journal of Inclusive Education, Vol, 2/1. Thomas B., 2006, Fund the Child: Tackling Inequity & Antiquity in School Finance. Retrieved October, 10, 2010, from the World Wide Web: . Yogesh, K., 2007, Socio-economic regions, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol: 107 Issue: 5. Noga, O., 2009, Socio-Economic Status, and Community College Enrollment , The Journal of Higher Education, Vol: 80 Issue: 2. William, M., 2008, Social aspects, Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, Vol.14 Issue: 3. Vyas, S.,2006, Constructing Socio-Economic Status Indices: How to Use Principal Components Analysis, Health Policy and Planning, Vol: 21 Issue: 6. Appendix Beilharz, P., 2007, 'Social democracy and social justice', Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, Vol, 25/1. I accessed the journal online through the following link. I read the whole information and selected what was necessary for the fulfillment of the assignment. Levitas, R., 2006, The concept of social exclusion and the new Durkheimian hegemony', Critical Social Policy, Vol.16/1. The concept of Integration and Differentiation was crucial in helping attend to the topic in question. It is well explained in the following diagram. I therefore used the information to explain much about marginalization and exclusion. Lingard, B., 2005, 'The disadvantaged schools programme: caught between literacy and local management of schools', International Journal of Inclusive Education, Vol, 2/1. This article is not freely available in the internet. I accessed the abstract through the following link After reading the abstract, I found it essential in answering some of the concepts I needed. I then went to the public library where I got full information about the contents. Thomas B., 2006, Fund the Child: Tackling Inequity & Antiquity in School Finance. Retrieved October, 10, 2010, from the World Wide Web: The information is available in the following link: . Vyas, S., & Kumaranayake, L. 2006, Constructing Socio-Economic Status Indices: How to Use Principal Components Analysis, Health Policy and Planning, Vol: 21 Issue: 6. Seema Vyas is a Research Fellow with the Health Policy Unit, Department of Public and Policy, LSHTM. She specializes in quantitative and private health sector analysis. Lilani Kumaranayake is a Lecturer in Health Economics and Policy, Department of Public Health and Policy, LSHTM. She specializes in the economics of HIV/AIDS, private health sector and quantitative analysis. The two authors have provided vital information about the topic in question. I therefore selected what is necessary for the assignment. Read More