Do Public Schools Favour the Students Who Have Money Over the Lower Income Students?

Do public schools favour the students who have money to spend, over lower income students? Do they make requests of students for projects, that a lower income student cannot afford to compete with in an effort to get better grades? Do the higher income students get more attention because they have access to better supplies and equipment to use for their school work?

It is a disturbing group of questions. Public school is supposed to be an equal opportunity for all children, no matter what their economic background is. The simple fact is though, that those students who do not have access to the same level of resources as a higher income family does, are often left with less glamorous and much simpler options, when it comes to school assignments and school projects. Even simple research is more difficult for children with less means.

Let's face it, even in elementary schools these days, competition between students can be very fierce at times. Look at how out of hand and ridiculous some of the annual school projects have become. When one child has full access to all kinds of technology, from personal computers to cameras, any necessary art and school supplies, and so forth, and the next one has very little, which child is going to end up with the better grades and projects, no matter how hard they try?

When even extra credit is based on how involved or fancy and detailed an assignment is, and that detail is based on what they have access to, or what they can buy, the lower income student will lose out. A fancier report, project and so forth makes for a much better presentation. People, including many instructors are impressed by a super presentation. Even though that should not be a gauge for the child's abilities or proficiency, the glitz often gets the attention, and the awards and praise.

Teachers try to be impartial and look at each individual's efforts. Unless they are told or know already, how do they tell that one child is just not trying, or another has all kinds of resources and help? They have to go on what is in front of them. Of course, as they learn each student's faults and strengths, that will give them some clues. A lower income child cannot possibly compete on the same educational playing field, with less and poorer quality equipment.

When teachers make assignments, that includes the assumption that all the students have full access to things like a computer at home, to type their work up on. If they mark down for handwritten work, how is the child who doesn't have that equipment, have a fair chance to make the highest grades possible? If they are going to make those demands, shouldn't they make sure all students have an equal working chance, equal supplies? Shouldn't they start on as a level playing ground as possible, and then be graded from there?

I have seen projects come home that say, just use what you have around the house or buy inexpensive supplies,. What if you don't even have access to simple things like that? Many children in public schools don't. What if your family budget doesn't allow for even the least expensive school or project supplies. They may need every penny just to survive?

Support systems for children at home may vary too. Some of that may have nothing whatsoever to do with parental income. There are attentive and inattentive parents in any income bracket. Attentive parents definitely can help make a difference in the quality of a child's work. They can't bridge the gap for poor external resources like technology, transportation or necessary supplies.

Add into these factors, the poor self image the rich versus poor student image promotes in the same public school. It is bad enough to deal with peer pressure for clothing and appearance. Throw in grades and competition based on what a child has, even if it isn't intentional. How is the student going to feel about themselves then? What do you think goes through their heads when they see their simple project sitting next to some "got bucks" child's? Some kids just quit trying, out of shear embarrassment or frustration. Some may see it as a challenge to do the best with what they have. Why does the lower income student even have to make that choice in a public school? Maybe we should focus more on the basics of education, and not the extraneous details.

Some public schools offer rental programs for things like computers and cameras, and a required supplies. With lower school budgets, these are few and far between. That is seen as a luxury item, when school funding is cut back to bare bones in a public school. Guess which children will take the worst hit from that particular cutback. It isn't just third world countries who need better supplies for their students. It is a problem in any public school system.

We do the best with what we have. How does a student do the best, when other students have more resources from which to pull, and the results are judged with a grade? Before you answer that question with a quick reply, step into the lower income student's shoes, when an assignment or project comes home with your child. Do public schools favour the students with more money to spend, over lower income students?