The Merits of Higher Education
By: Elizabeth Fahey
Local School Councils (LSCs) greatly impact the educational experience for Chicago Public School (CPS) students. These councils function based on the capital they possess. If a school doesn’t have capital, it loses the potential it has to succeed. In the Southside of Chicago, Bogan Computer Technical High School, for example, there is a low-income rate of 90%. There are schools such as William Jones College Prep, located in downtown Chicago, where there is a low-income rate of 45%. Even though these two schools are a part of the same school district, there are wide gaps in academic achievement. Jones is National Blue Ribbon School with a graduation rate of 96.1% while Bogan has a graduation rate of 56.8%. Since Bogan has a high low-income rate, there are families that cannot invest financial capital into a LSC because of their low socioeconomic status (SES). As of now, low performing schools continue to drop in success rates while high performing schools continue to increase in theirs. The capital of a school’s LSC affects the way parents, school staff, and students are approaching or being approached to education revealing the inequity in education.
Jones’ LSC has brought in extra funding and opportunities for the students. One of the most popular and beneficial organizations led by its LSC is “Friends of Jones.” Parents and private organizations are able to invest their time and money into the school through this program. There are few other programs like this, Friends of “Payton, Northside, and Whitney Young.” All these schools are also ranked top 10 performing high schools in the state of Illinois. Parents are eager to invest in these high achieving schools. None of these schools have a low-income status higher than 40% with the exception of Jones. Parents fear their children “will not attain their [parent’s] affluence” unless they attend a successful school (Making Schools and Society Just 162). Through a LSC, parents are able to indirectly give their children opportunities to lead them to success. Even low-income families are more involved when seeing first-hand the impact that parent involvement can have on a school. The donation and participation in LSC brings opportunities for the students. Students gain an advantage in resources that other students may not have the access to. However, there is no Friends of “Bogan, Harper, Juarez, Kelly, etc.” which are all low performing schools in Illinois and have a high low-income status. Not all parents of a LSC can afford to be participative. Having a low SES “makes parents less effective” in investing in their child’s school since they can’t afford to (Willingham 34). The LSC becomes less effective due to the parents who are not able to contribute into their child’s school. This ineffectiveness explains why there are less organized programs to raise funding for a school. LSCs are made up of mostly parents and, consequently, parent involvement is crucial for a strong LSC. Low-income parents, as individuals, hold the perception that they have nothing to offer because they lack financial capital. These parents “cannot imagine the forms their collective power might take” and fail to take into account the worth of involvement in their child’s school (Making Schools and Society Just 163). School staff and parent participation is also based on the school achievement. Participation in top ranked schools, such as Jones, has more value because the students have proven they can be successful. In a school where there is already success, parents will “use their considerable resources to ensure their own children get the ‘best’ schooling” (Making Schools and Society Just 160). This justifies why high performing schools continue to become higher performing. Parents want to maintain the status of their child’s schooling to ensure academic achievement. Teachers at Bogan or other high low-income rate schools believe “kids are not rewarding to teach” (Making Schools and Society Just 163). These teachers are influenced by the quality of their students which form the quality of their participation in the school. Students who are at low achieving schools are seen and are immediately labeled as failures and therefore undeserving. Teachers become more willing to invest their time in their LSC when they know that the students will go further with the resources given to them. In order to break this cycle, teacher participation needs to increase, options need to be explored, and make it so that the amount of capital is not the determining factor in the quality of a school.
Jones’ LSC has brought in extra funding and opportunities for the students. One of the most popular and beneficial organizations led by its LSC is “Friends of Jones.” Parents and private organizations are able to invest their time and money into the school through this program. There are few other programs like this, Friends of “Payton, Northside, and Whitney Young.” All these schools are also ranked top 10 performing high schools in the state of Illinois. Parents are eager to invest in these high achieving schools. None of these schools have a low-income status higher than 40% with the exception of Jones. Parents fear their children “will not attain their [parent’s] affluence” unless they attend a successful school (Making Schools and Society Just 162). Through a LSC, parents are able to indirectly give their children opportunities to lead them to success. Even low-income families are more involved when seeing first-hand the impact that parent involvement can have on a school. The donation and participation in LSC brings opportunities for the students. Students gain an advantage in resources that other students may not have the access to. However, there is no Friends of “Bogan, Harper, Juarez, Kelly, etc.” which are all low performing schools in Illinois and have a high low-income status. Not all parents of a LSC can afford to be participative. Having a low SES “makes parents less effective” in investing in their child’s school since they can’t afford to (Willingham 34). The LSC becomes less effective due to the parents who are not able to contribute into their child’s school. This ineffectiveness explains why there are less organized programs to raise funding for a school. LSCs are made up of mostly parents and, consequently, parent involvement is crucial for a strong LSC. Low-income parents, as individuals, hold the perception that they have nothing to offer because they lack financial capital. These parents “cannot imagine the forms their collective power might take” and fail to take into account the worth of involvement in their child’s school (Making Schools and Society Just 163). School staff and parent participation is also based on the school achievement. Participation in top ranked schools, such as Jones, has more value because the students have proven they can be successful. In a school where there is already success, parents will “use their considerable resources to ensure their own children get the ‘best’ schooling” (Making Schools and Society Just 160). This justifies why high performing schools continue to become higher performing. Parents want to maintain the status of their child’s schooling to ensure academic achievement. Teachers at Bogan or other high low-income rate schools believe “kids are not rewarding to teach” (Making Schools and Society Just 163). These teachers are influenced by the quality of their students which form the quality of their participation in the school. Students who are at low achieving schools are seen and are immediately labeled as failures and therefore undeserving. Teachers become more willing to invest their time in their LSC when they know that the students will go further with the resources given to them. In order to break this cycle, teacher participation needs to increase, options need to be explored, and make it so that the amount of capital is not the determining factor in the quality of a school.
Willingham, Daniel. "Why Does Family Wealth Affect Learning?." American Educator. Web. 14 Feb. 2014.
Oakes, Jeannie, John Rogers, and Martin Lipton. "Making Schools and Society Just." Learning power: organizing for education and justice. New York: Teachers College Press, 2006. 157-173. Print.
"Bogan High School in Chicago, Illinois (IL)." - Test Results, Rating, Ranking, Grades, Scores, Classes, Enrollment, Teachers, Students, and Report Card. Web. 3 Mar. 2014.
"Illinois Report Card." Illinois Report Card. Web. 1 Mar. 2014.
Oakes, Jeannie, John Rogers, and Martin Lipton. "Making Schools and Society Just." Learning power: organizing for education and justice. New York: Teachers College Press, 2006. 157-173. Print.
"Bogan High School in Chicago, Illinois (IL)." - Test Results, Rating, Ranking, Grades, Scores, Classes, Enrollment, Teachers, Students, and Report Card. Web. 3 Mar. 2014.
"Illinois Report Card." Illinois Report Card. Web. 1 Mar. 2014.