Educational Success Is Largely Determined By Where You Live
Posted June 21st, 2012 by care2by Judy Molland at care2.com
Earlier this year, Care2′s Kristina Chew wrote about the widening gap between rich and poor students in schools across the U.S. over the past few decades and how, as a result, the gap in standardized test scores between affluent and low-income students has grown by 40 percent since the 1960′s.
Now comes a report that demonstrates exactly how this works. If you thought that children receive different educational advantages, depending on where they live, you are absolutely correct.
Wealth Has Outsized Effect On Education
24/7 Wall St. analyzed Census data from 2006 through 2010 for more than 10,000 unified school districts in the United States. (There are over 14,000 in total.) To illustrate the influence wealth and poverty have on educational attainment, 24/7 Wall St. examined the wealthiest and poorest public school districts in the country. Here’s what they found:
Wealth appears to have an outsized effect on education at the local level. Residents that live in wealthy school districts have among the best schools in the nation based on graduation rates, test scores and independent ratings of academic success. Children who attend these schools are more likely to earn a college degree than the national average.
(….)
Nearly all of the wealthiest school districts are within a short distance of one of the richest cities in the country. Other than one suburb of Portland, Ore., all of the wealthiest school districts are commuter towns of New York City, located in either Fairfield County, Conn., or Westchester County, N.Y. The poorest districts are rural communities scattered all over the country, from Ohio and Kentucky to Texas and Mississippi.
How does this have an impact on schools?
10 Richest And 10 Poorest School Districts
Here’s the list of the 10 richest school districts; you’ll see that all but one are in the states of New York and Connecticut:
1. Scarsdale Union Free School District, New York
2. Weston School District, Connecticut
3. Riverdale School District, Oregon
4. Chappaqua Central School District, New York
5. Briarcliff Manor Union Free School District, New York
6. Byram Hill Central School District, New York
7. Edgemont Union Free School District, New York
8. New Canaan School District, Connecticut
9. Bronxville Union Free School District, New York
10.Darien School District, Connecticut
1. Barbourville Independent School District, Kentucky
2. Monticello Independent School District, Kentucky
3. North Bolivar School District, Mississippi
4. West Bolivar School District, Mississippi
5. Santa Maria Independent School District, Texas
6. Hayti R-II School District, Missouri
7. New Boston Local School District, Ohio
8. San Perlita Independent School District, Texas
9. Pineville Independent School District, Kentucky
10. Centennial School District R-I, Colorado
Yes, it is all about location, location, location.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, all of the wealthiest school districts spend far more per pupil than the national average. The Darien, Connecicut, public school district spends $15,433 per student per year, more than 50% above the U.S. average of $10,591. The Edgemont, New York, public school spends more than $25,000 per student annually. Barbourville, Kentucky, the poorest school district, spends less than one-third that amount.
There are other factors too: parents who are both working long hours to make ends meet cannot spend as much time with their children as those who have the luxury of a stay-at-home parent; nor can they afford all those extras that are increasingly necessary in this time of budget shortfalls. And the 25% of children in the U.S. who are living in poverty probably don’t get enough to eat, which also hampers their ability to study.
So next time someone starts blaming teachers for all that’s wrong with education, remind them of this report.
In recent years, elected officials and policymaker have declared that there should be “no excuses” for schools with low test scores. The “no excuses” reformers maintain that all children can attain academic proficiency without regard to poverty, disability, or other conditions, and that someone must be held accountable if they do not. That someone is invariably their teachers.
This is clearly false reasoning.
3 Comments
June 21, 2012 at 9:54 pm by JCStay at home parents are a luxury? Careful with your words. I know many parents who are forced to stay home because they cannot make enough to cover daycare. I expect more awareness from Momrising.
[Reply]
Anita Reply:
June 23rd, 2012 at 11:11 am
Thanks for noting that, JC. Great point. This article was cross-posted from care2.com– we’ll pass along your comment.
[Reply]
Thank you for writing this article.
It used to be widely understood that affluence and poverty impact academic achievement.
The current line of thinking is that teachers in high poverty areas are doing something wrong, and if we could only remove these teachers and replace them with highly effective teachers ( 3 in a row, specifically), the impact of poverty on academic achievement disappears.
It’s absurd, but it’s the thinking our Secretary of Education believes. In my opinion, it’s all a convenient distraction from the rising tide of child poverty in our nation.
Again, thanks for the article.
[Reply]
Trackbacks
Leave a Comment