User:Melired/sandbox

A elementary school teacher in Iowa delivers a lesson to her students virtually.

Spring 2021 PJHC 394

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, schools in the U.S. began closing down in March 2020. This was a historic and unprecedented upheaval of the U.S. schooling system, that forced schools to a near shut-down. At the very peak of school closures, they affected 55.1 million students in 124,000 public and private U.S. schools. The effects of widespread school shut-downs were felt nationwide--- and exacerbated several social inequalities in gender, technology, educational achievement and mental health.

Initial Closure of Schools

At the state-wide level, several states either ordered or recommended for schools to be closed. State-wide ordinances for schools closures began on March 16, 2020 and by March 24, 2020, all states had closed until further notice. In the interest of public health, school closures for the COVID-19 pandemic were used to curb transmission of the disease and encourage social distancing, much like in the past with Swine Flu and MRSA outbreaks.

Disruption of School Feeding Programs

A student picks up a school provided meal.

A major concern regarding the shut down of in-person learning in the U.S. was the disruption of school feeding programs. It is estimated that 29.4 million children daily receive their meals through the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). Food insecurity can have very serious effects on children's outcomes: short-term effects may be fatigue and low immune while long-term effects may be emotional, physical and psychological harms.Given that such a large volume of students depend on subsidized meals provided through the NSLP, several individual school districts and state legislatures initially moved to respond accordingly to distribute meals even after the closing of schools. The Department of Education in South Carolina announced in March 2020 that they would be instituting "Grab-n-Go" meal sites throughout the states that would be open five days a week.

On a nationwide scale, during Summer 2020, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced an extension of meal waivers that would allow students to receive meals throughout the summer. On October 9, 2020 the USDA announced that meal waiver programs would be extended until the end of the 2020-2021 school year and on March 9, 2021 the USDA announced that they intended to keep the program in effect until September 30, 2021.

An empty classroom at Austin Community College.

However, even amid meal waivers certain school districts have identified problems with getting students and families to access food resources. In Arizona, the Tuscan Independent School District, which would serve 35,000 meals a day in a normal year, has experienced a 90% decrease in meal consumption. The School Nutrition Association also concluded that they were serving about 80% fewer meals than they would normally. Potential reasons for this drop in school meal usage are lack of parental availability (as they cannot visit food sites due to work conflicts) or public health concerns.

Effects on Post-Secondary Education

A classroom with socially distanced desks.

Universities were among the first institutions in the United States to transition to online learning. Enrollment for community colleges in the Fall 2020 semester dropped by 10% from the past year, with the sharpest declines occurring among first-generation students and students of color. Fall 2020 enrollment losses in undergraduate institutions were also more pronounced for men than women, with men experiencing an overall 5.1% decrease in enrollment compared to a 7% decrease for women.

Implementation of Hybrid and Virtual Learning

Two students learn on a digital device.

The overwhelming majority of schools shifted to online instruction starting in March 2020, implementing either completely virtual or hybrid learning. This has presented several challenges for both educators, students and their families due to unequal access to education and inadequate home learning environments. Several online surveys conducted in March during the beginning of the pandemic showed that teachers had several students not logging in to complete assignments. In comparison to in-person learning models, teachers are teaching less new material to students and taking a longer time to cover material, a trend that is especially evident in high poverty schools.

Online Teacher Instruction

Research regarding online teacher instruction has showed that it is only effective if students have consistent access to internet and electronic devices and teachers have received targeted training and supports for online instruction. Unfortunately, this has not been the reality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many teachers were not well-trained or prepared to solely transition to virtual learning. In a study conducted by the Economic Policy Institute, it was found that about 1/3 of teachers reported not receiving any training in the past 12 months on how to use computers for educational instruction. In a follow-up analysis of this finding, of those who did receive technology training, about 1/3 did not find it useful. Another study showed that at the beginning of the pandemic, teachers felt like that had an above average work-load trying to adapt to online instruction.

Student Access to Technology

Inequities in digital technologies were known and present before the spread of COVID-19, but they have been exacerbated now that remote learning has assumed a more prominent role as parents are facilitating the education of their children.According to the U.S. Census American Community Survey in 2018, one out of every four children do not have full access to digital technology at home.

This lack of technology is not felt equally across all students: certain population are more likely to lack technology access than other. On a regional level there are grand differences in technology access depending on the state. Mississippi and Arkansas have over 40% of students without full technology, compared to Massachusetts and New Hampshire with less than 16%. Numerous sources also found that students, especially those in rural and low-income areas, struggle to maintain consistent access to the technology needed for virtual learning. School-aged children below the federal poverty line at 26% less likely to have access to both internet and a computer than students above the federal poverty threshold. Other populations at risk for having less access to technology are students of colors, and especially Native students, of which only 50% are reported to have full access to technology.This means that a considerable amount of students lack access to technology, which presented a problem as education shifted to an overwhelming virtual mode of delivery.

A teacher deliver a lesson over Zoom.

Some students also rely on free internet and technology provided in school, which would not be an option for these students under in-person school closures.

Special Student Populations

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several school districts struggled to create virtual programming for their special needs students, who were often at an increased risk of from a loss of in-person education. There are an estimated 6.7 million students in the United States that receive Special Education Services under the Individuals With Disabilities Act, which requires school districts to provide a free and appropriate education to students with special needs. Children and youth with special needs and individualized education programs needs be at greater risk for the negative effects of long-term distance learning. Even with proper resources, special needs students can often not receive the same level of education at home (lack of career/technical education, physical therapy and medical care.) A shift to virtual learning situates parents as the primary implementer of their child's educations, which can be hard on families who do not have the knowledge or infrastructure to take this on. In several cases, parents cannot replace the skills and expertise of special education teachers, which impacts students developments (particularly those with Down Syndrome and Specific Learning Disabilities).

The disruption in daily school routines may have severe ramifications on students with conditions like autism, which thrive on routine and regular schedules. Additionally, students with Autism are more likely to have anxiety and are losing key social and learning opportunities that are helpful for their development.

Recommendations for providing adequate care to students with special needs include utilizing Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBA) provided by a nonpublic agency (NPA) who will be able to support students both academically and behaviorally. A collaboration between schools and NPAs has been shown to yield outcomes regarding attempts to limit regression in students skills.

Modified Grading Scales

Although school districts across the country varied in their implementation of grading scales during the pandemic, nearly every district choose to amend how students were evaluated. Universal pass/fail, optional pass/fail and no grading systems were all adapted during the Spring 2020 semester.

In California, the California Department of Education (CDE) set out guidelines on how districts should approach grading. Among these included keeping their pre-pandemic grade, assigning students automatic credit among completion of a course (as opposed to letter or numerical grades) and allowing students to opt out of a course until they feel adept to complete it. Most school districts in California followed CDE's guidelines, with the LA school district choosing to adopt a no-fail policy. School districts across the country followed in implementing similar modified grading scales, with DC Public Schools and Chicago Public Schools choosing to give students letter-grades based on their pre-pandemic assessments, although students are given the opportunity to improve their grades.

Overall, school districts are encouraged to approach grading in a holistic and equitable manner which attempts to only help not harm students. However, several people have pointed out that this "do no harm" approach does not address the existing problems with grading systems before COVID-19.

Burden of Childcare

Schools provide essential childcare for parents who work at no cost. When the COVID-19 pandemic forced schools to shut-down for in-person learning, many families lost free childcare, which many depended on to be able to work. As a result, many parents, primarily mothers, left the workforce, creating an gendered departure from traditional working conditions. During the immediate onset of the pandemic, unemployment rates for women jumped drastically- from 4.4% in March 2020 to 16.5% in April 2020. According to McKinsey and Oxford economics, 29% of women with children under 10 were considering leaving the workforce during 2020 compared to only 13% of men. The same study also expected that it would take until 2024 for women's employment in the U.S. to return to pre-pandemic levels, as opposed to men's level of employment which will return to pre-pandemic level one year earlier.

Parent involvement has been identified as an important factor for student achievement in both traditional and online school settings. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic parents have often struggled with increased responsibilities and uncertainties in their student's education. According to a study conducted by the American Journal of Qualitative Research, the biggest concern for parents navigating virtual learning with their children was balancing responsibilities to address the needs of their student learners while also keeping up with their job.Other concerns parents had were accessibility (both in regards to technology and students with disabilities), lack of student motivation and learning outcomes. Specific challenges that affected parent's abilities to be involved in virtual learning are economic resources and lack of proper infrastructure, like technology and internet access, and subsequently the knowledge to use technological resources. The degree that these challenges were felt by parents depended on several factors, such as age of children, amount of children and family socioeconomic status.

School Re-openings

In June 2020, the American Academy of Pediatrics strongly recommended that schools re-open as soon as possible to preserve education and socialization while limiting the growing presence of educational inequalities.

Teachers on a zoom call.

Teacher Concerns

While most children are at a low-risk for the serious and long-term consequences of COVID-19, many teachers and educators are a part of higher risk health groups that may expose them to severe consequences and side effects of COVID-19. For example, 28% of public school teachers are over fifty, which would designate them as an at-risk group. Educators have also expressed doubts that the proper social distancing techniques will be difficult to execute in a school environment, as many schools can have a high volume of students with not enough classroom or space to adjust them. Poor-quality school buildings with bad air quality, not enough bathroom facilities and inadequate cleaning techniques also pose a challenge in the journey to school reopenings.

COVID-19 Learning Gap

Students using a laptop.

The shift to online learning had a variety of effects on how students learned during the Spring 2020 and Fall 2020 semesters. Several studies have shown that online learning is less effective than in-person learning. Because of this, parents, educators and policy makers have grown increasing concerned about a potential learning gap that may arise following the year-long period of online instruction. There were also several concerns regarding the interruption of learning when initial shut-downs were occurring and the subsequent transition to online platforms resulting in days of instruction being lost. According to Stanford University's Center for Research on Education Outcomes, averages for days of instruction lost for the Spring 2020 semester ranged from 57 to 183 days in Reading and 136 to 232 days in Math.

Several experts have compared the potential COVID-19 learning gap the the phenomenon dubbed the "Summer Slide" where students lose learning abilities and forget academic content after being out of school for the summer. Given that chronic absenteeism and students "not logging in" is a key concern for educators attempting to teach and reach students, it can be compared to the lack of educational connection typically experienced over summer breaks. Studies show that the more students miss school, the worse they perform. Several school districts are having trouble getting students to log in to online school: the Los Angeles school district reported that up a third of their students were not logging into class in April 2020 and schools in rural and underserved areas have had trouble with not having proper internet and technology access.

Given that the COVID-19 pandemic has presented unprecedented challenges across society, there are a variety of reasons that students may not be logging in for online instruction. Some students may not have access to the proper technology and internet access. Others may be hindered by home factors like having to take care of other siblings at home, not having a quiet space to focus or having to work a job during the pandemic. Moreso, other students may not feel motivated to complete school work for a variety of reasons such as the widespread implementation of lax grading policies or lack of student-teacher relationship. However, no matter the reason, lack of educational engagement will likely result in decreased learning and educational achievement.

A major concern with the learning gap arising due to COVID-19 is the variability of online instruction across student populations. Students who were able to consistently access quality online educational instruction will likely experience less of a gap than students who experiences barriers to access.The effects of long-term distance learning are likely to vary depending on the age and grade level of the students. Elementary school students may especially struggle with distance learning, especially without adult support, as they are still developing the skills needed to regulate their behaviors/emotions, attention spans and learning.

Socioeconomic Implications

While overall virtual learning reports higher rates of absenteeism than traditional methods of schools, absentee rates remain higher in schools that are situated in lower-income communities. Given that the more school days a student misses, the worse they retain information and perform on educational assessments, many are concerned with the effects absenteeism may have on low-income students. According to a April 2020 study conducted by Education Week, 64% of teachers in schools with a large amount of low-income students said that their pupils faced technology limitations, as compared to only 21% of teachers in schools with a small amount of low-income students.

Many stakeholders worry that the effects of COVID-19 on lower-income students could last well beyond the pandemic. In a study conducted by Yale economist Fabrizio Zilibotti, it was determined that students coming from the bottom 20% of income levels will be the most likely to experience a negative and long-term effects of school closings. The study found that students in low-income communities quickly lost several skills and forgot key concepts they had learned prior to the pandemic, but students in affluent communities did not experience severe learning loss. The assumption here is that wealthy and affluent parents have the time and resources to dedicate to their children's virtual education, while low-income parents do not have the same access to resources.

In addition to economic inequalities among students, there has been evidence of racial inequalities. According to a study conducted by McKinsey, up to 40% of Black students and 30% of Hispanic students received no online instruction during school shutdowns, as opposed to only 10% of white students. Latinx and Black students are also more likely to be enrolled in school with large proportions of low-income students, which as stated earlier face a higher rate of technology limitations. Parents of Black and Latinx students are more likely to be employed in sectors where they cannot "telecommute," which means that students with these parents will likely not have an adult at home to facilitate their education.

Mental Health of Students

Many mental health professionals are concerned with the impacts of COVID-19 on a younger generation which has already reported staggering levels of depression, anxiety and suicide even before the pandemic. Students already coping with mental health conditions have been more susceptible to the mental health impacts of COVID-19. In many situations closures of schools also means that students lose access to school mental health resources. Several students who experience mental health conditions are often in stressful home situations and may not feel comfortable or have privacy to talk about their situations virtually. School routines can also function as an anchor or coping mechanism for young people with mental health issues, and the loss of said routines can severely challenge how students cope. The closing of schools also means that students are losing access to many of the social networks and interactions they had with teachers and fellow students. In a Gallup study conducting in May 2020, many parents said that the separation from other students and teachers presented a challenge for their children.

According to a study conducted by Active Minds, a nonprofit group dedicated to improving the mental health of students, in April 2020, 20% of college students said their mental health significantly worsened under COVID-19. Among both high school and college students, 38% said that said they had trouble focusing and that doing work was stressful. Specifically for students living under stay-at-home orders, 8 out of 10 students said they were struggling to focus on school and avoid distractions. Evidently, several students were struggling to continue performing well at school while maintaining their mental health, but many did not know how to cope or ask for health. The same survey noted that 55% of students did not know where to get help for their mental health.

Studies conducted during the Fall 2020 semester showed similar patterns of mental health challenge among student populations. Many students felt loneliness, isolation, stress, anxiety, depression and sadness. 89% of college students said that they are experiencing stress and anxiety as a result of COVID-19 and 25% said that their depression significantly worsened. A change from the onset of the pandemic is that more students (71%) reported knowing where to access mental health resources. A majority of students also reported feeling hopeful for their futures.

External Links

Fall 2020 PJHC 371

1. History (move stuff here from the parent article, as well as expand on its content) (Melissa)

2. Inequalities in Different Educational Stages (Vanessa)

2.1 K-12

2.2 Higher Education

3. Possible Factors for Inequalities

3.1 Race (Vanessa)

3.1.1 White Supremacy in Curriculum (Bryn)

3.2 Socioeconomic Status (Vanessa)

3.3 Private vs. Public Education (Melissa)

3.4 Language Barriers (Melissa)

4. Educational Disparities

4.1 Achievement Gap

4.2 Summer Learning Gap (Benjamin)

4.3 Discipline Gap (Benjamin)

4.4 Prison Pipeline (Benjamin)

5. Potential Solutions

5.1 Early Intervention (Melissa)

5.2 School Funding (Vanessa)

5.3 Charter Schools (Melissa)

5.4 School Discipline Reform (Vanessa)

6. See also

7. References

8. Further Reading

9. External Links

Outline Plans: Again, there is major restructuring happening. The history section, which I plan on expanding with content from another article that I feel would be more appropriate here, will be significantly upgraded. Vanessa is adding the Inequalities in Different Stages of Education section and the two subsections, as we felt it was appropriate to highlight the distinctions in different stages of education. We are both working on topics within the Possible Factors for Inequalities section. I am working on Private vs Public Education and Language Barriers, as this was not addressed at all in the article, but I feel as could be very beneficial to have included. Benjamin plans to expand on the section under Education Disparities. Bryn plans to create a new article which addresses white supremacy in curriculum, which will be linked to our article. Both Vanessa and I are also working on the Potential Solutions section together. Specifically, I am taking on Early Intervention and Charter schools. These are already part of the article, but just organized oddly. I plan on expanding on both of these subjects and also restructuring them so the entire article can flow better.

1. History: The parent article, Educational Inequality, has a section on the history of educational inequality in the US. This would be more appropriately included in our article, since it has a US focus. I also plan on adding information on how racial gaps in achievement have been perpetuated through discriminatory policy throughout history, specifically in Jim Crow America. I also want to touch on the legacy of slavery, and how this affects education.
   1. Barton, Paul E., and Richard J. Coley. "The Black-White Achievement Gap: When Progress Stopped. Policy Information Report." Educational Testing Service (2010).
   2. Graziella Bertocchi, Arcangelo Dimico,The racial gap in education and the legacy of slavery, Journal of Comparative Economics, Volume 40, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 581-595, ISSN 0147-5967, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2012.04.001.
   3. Lin, Ann Chih., Harris, David R.. The Colors of Poverty: Why Racial and Ethnic Disparities Persist. United States: Russell Sage Foundation, 2008.
2. Private vs Public Education: This will focus on how education differs in a public vs private setting, and how this aids educational inequality. It will also address how private schools tend to have more resources, and how this creates different learning environments than public schools.
   1. Davies, J. B., Zhang, J. and Zeng, J. 2003, Intergenerational Mobility under Private vs. Public Education, working paper, National University of Singapore.
   2. Couch, Jim F., William F. Shughart, and Al L. Williams. "Private school enrollment and public school performance." Public Choice 76, no. 4 (1993): 301-312.
   3. Epple, Dennis, David Figlio, and Richard Romano. "Competition between private and public schools: testing stratification and pricing predictions." Journal of public Economics 88, no. 7-8 (2004): 1215-1245.
   4. Epple, Dennis, and Richard E. Romano. "Competition between Private and Public Schools, Vouchers, and Peer-Group Effects." The American Economic Review 88, no. 1 (1998): 33-62. Accessed September 25, 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/116817.
3. Language Barrier: This was a section that was not originally included in the article. I plan to include research on how having English as a second language can affect education development. There would also be some information on immigration on children from different countries, and how this affects educational outcomes.
   1. Warren, John Robert. "Educational Inequality among White and Mexican-Origin Adolescents in the American Southwest: 1990." Sociology of Education 69, no. 2 (1996): 142-58. Accessed September 25, 2020. doi:10.2307/2112803.
   2. Grubb, Erica Black. "Breaking the language barrier: The right to bilingual education." Harv. CR-CLL Rev. 9 (1974): 52.
   3. Huss-Keeler, Rebecca L. "Teacher perception of ethnic and linguistic minority parental involvement and its relationships to children's language and literacy learning: A case study." Teaching and Teacher education 13, no. 2 (1997): 171-182.
   4. Rubenstein, Ilene Z. "Educational expectations: How they differ around the world: Implications for teaching ESL college students." Community College Journal of Research and Practice 30, no. 5-6 (2006): 433-441.
   5. Miller, Jennifer. "Identity and language use: The politics of speaking ESL in schools." Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts 45 (2004): 290-315.
4. Early Intervention: The current section primarily includes information from one research study. I plan to vary the source material to make the topic more representative of different viewpoints. I also want to include some of the extended effects that Early Intervention can have beyond education (socioeconomic status).
   1. Heckman, James J. "The economics of inequality: The value of early childhood education." American Educator 35, no. 1 (2011): 31.
   2. Magnuson, Katherine A., Marcia K. Meyers, Christopher J. Ruhm, and Jane Waldfogel. "Inequality in preschool education and school readiness." American educational research journal 41, no. 1 (2004): 115-157.
   3. Walker, Susan P., Theodore D. Wachs, Sally Grantham-McGregor, Maureen M. Black, Charles A. Nelson, Sandra L. Huffman, Helen Baker-Henningham et al. "Inequality in early childhood: risk and protective factors for early child development." The lancet 378, no. 9799 (2011): 1325-1338.
   4. Chittleborough, Catherine R., Murthy N. Mittinty, Debbie A. Lawlor, and John W. Lynch. "Effects of simulated interventions to improve school entry academic skills on socioeconomic inequalities in educational achievement." Child development 85, no. 6 (2014): 2247-2262.
5. Charter Schools: I want to address more of the structural inequalities that can possibly be created by Charter schools, even if they were intended to be a solution to educational inequality. There is also research that ties in race and socioeconomic status into charter schools as well, which is necessary to include in this section.
   1. Frankenberg, Erica, and Chungmei Lee. "Charter schools and race: A lost opportunity for integrated education." (2003).
   2. Orfield, Gary, and Erica Frankenberg, eds. Educational delusions?: Why choice can deepen inequality and how to make schools fair. Univ of California Press, 2013.
   3. Rofes, Eric, and Lisa M. Stulberg, eds. The emancipatory promise of charter schools: Toward a progressive politics of school choice. SUNY Press, 2004.
   4. Wells, Amy Stuart, ed. Where charter school policy fails: The problems of accountability and equity. Vol. 12. Teachers College Press, 2002

Edits to the History Section of the Educational Inequalities in the U.S Article

https://stars.library.ucf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1144&context=honorstheses

The earliest forms of education in the U.S. were primarily religiously motivated. The main purpose of education in the 17th and 18th was to teach children how to read the bible and abide by Puritan values. These values were espoused by the religious white colonists, who would often try to assimilate indigenous children into white puritan standards and convert them to Christianity. Through the process of assimilation, indigenous populations were often forced to give up several cultural traditions, including their native language. Forced assimilation would continue past colonial times. In the early 20th century, indigenous children in certain regions of the U.S. were forcibly taken from their families and enrolled in boarding schools. The purpose of this was again to "civilize" and assimilate indigenous communities into American society.

Historically, African-Americans in the United States have also had several troubles trying to access quality education. In colonial times, many white people felt that if Black people, slaves in particular, were to become educated they would start to challenge the systems of power that kept them oppressed. Southern states feared slaves would begin to act out against their slave owners and even escape to Northern states if they were educated. This caused several states to enact laws that prohibited slaves from learning to read or write. These were popularly referred to as anti-literacy statutes. Although punishment varied from state to state, several southern states (Virginia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia) would criminally prosecute any slave who attempted to learn to read or write. In some cases, white people could also be punished for attempting to educate slaves. Before the Civil War, educating slaves was often considered a criminal offense. In some communities, religious groups would attempt to make schools for African-Americans to read or write, but it was often met with severe opposition from white community members. The Civil War and the emancipation of slaves led to a push for more education of African-Americans. Most Black people did not have access to education until the Reconstruction era following the Civil War when public schools started to become more common.

Newly freed African-Americans prioritized education, and many considered it an effective way to empower their communities. In Southern states, Black residents would engage in collective action and collaborate with the Freedman's Bureau, northern philanthropic organizations, and other white groups to ensure their access to public education. However, even as more Black people gained education opportunities, inequality still persisted. Schools were still segregated and would receive less funding. This meant Black students were educated in worse facilities, with fewer resources and less well-paid teachers than their white counterparts. In the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) it was decided that educational facilities were allowed to segregate white students from students of color as long as the educational facilities were considered equal. In practice, separate educational facilities essentially meant fewer resources and access for Black and other minority students. On average White students received 17–70 percent more educational expenditures than their Black counterparts. The first Federal legal challenge of these unequal segregated educational systems would occur in California Mendez v. Westminster(1947) followed by Brown v. Board of Education (1954). The decision of Brown v. Board of Education would lead to the desegregation of schools by federal law.

Private vs Public Education (Proposed Edits)

There are several differences in how private schools operate when compared to public schools. Private schools are funded from resources outside of the government, which typically comes from a combination of student tuition, donations, fundraising, and endowments. Private school enrollment makes up about 10 percent of all K-12 enrollment in the U.S (about 4 million students), while public school enrollment encompasses 56.4 million students. Because private schools are funded outside of government channels, they often exercise more freedom in how they operate their schools. Many private schools choose to teach material outside of the state-mandated curriculum. They are also allowed to have religious affiliations and selection criteria for which students they accept. In contrast, public schools are not allowed to have religious ties and must accept any student that is geographically zoned in their area. There have been several arguments that have been raised against private school systems. Some argue that it perpetuates elitist forms of education, and has high barriers to entry, as tuition to private schools can be up to tens of thousands of dollars. For reference, the national average for the cost of a private school in the 2020-2021 school year is $11,004. Since several private schools have religious affiliations, there have also been arguments regarding potential bias and questionable standards in religious private schools.

Differences in private vs public education can have effects on the future achievement of children. Several studies point out the fact that students who attend private schools are more likely to graduate from high school and attend college afterward. There have been studies that point to the fact that areas where a homogenous public education system is present have higher amounts of inter-generational social mobility. In comparison, private education systems in can lead to higher inequality and less mobility. The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth has also pointed to the fact that students who attend private schools tend to earn more in their careers than compared to their public school counterparts.

Language Barrier

Students who are not proficient in English are put at a serious disadvantage when compared to their peers. There are communication difficulties, and many educators may treat students with low English proficiency as slow learners or intellectually disadvantaged. Educators may also not understand the cultural barriers and underestimate students. A consequence of this lack of understanding on the educator's side, could lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy: teachers treat students as less capable and students internalize these expectations and underperform. These students may also feel a cultural conflict between their native language and English. Cultural differences may cause students to feel a rejection of their native culture/language leading to a decrease in motivation in school. Most experts agree that it takes students around 5-7 years to learn academic English, which in a school setting can place students who do not know English behind their English-speaking classmates. There is a strong association between English-language ability and the success of students in school. As of 2015, there are nearly 5 million English language learner (ELL) students enrolled in U.S. public schools and they are the fastest-growing student population in the U.S. About 73% of ELL students speak Spanish as their first language, although the most common language will vary by state. 60% of English language learner students come from low-income families, where parents have very limited educational levels. Family income level and lack of English language skills are often two challenges that are intertwined in the barriers that ELL students face. ELL students also have disproportionality high dropout rates, low graduation rates, and low college completion rates.

Early Intervention

Research studies have revealed that early intervention in a child's education can have drastic effects on future growth and development in children. Early intervention can include a wide array of educational activities, including an increased emphasis on reading and writing, providing additional tools or resources for learning, as well as supplements to aid special education students.

The Perry Preschool Project in Ypsilanti, Michigan reaffirmed the positive relationship between early education and future achievement. The study assigned random 3- and 4-year-old children from low-income families to attend the Perry school, which had ample resources and a high teacher to student ratio. It also heavily emphasized the development of reading and writing skills. Once graduated, students who attended the Perry school were less than 1/5 as likely to have broken the law as compared with students who did not attend the preschool. The study also discovered that those who attended the preschool program earned, on average, $5,500 more per year than those who did not attend the school, pointing to a higher return on investment for the students who attended the Perry school. This study received wide-spread acclaim and validated the idea that early intervention is a powerful tool in alleviating educational and income inequality in America.

The Abecedarian Project in North Carolina is another study that found early intervention in education produced significant gains for future attainment. The study provided a group of infants from low-income families with early childhood education programs five days a week, eight hours each day. The educational programs emphasized language, and incorporated education into game activities. This program continued for 5 years. The group's future progress was then measured as they grew older, and compared to a control group that contained students in a similar socioeconomic status that did not receive early intervention. Children who received early education were more likely to attend college, graduate high school, and reported having higher salaries. They were also less likely to engage in criminal activities, and more likely to have consistent employment. This study was also highly influential in supporting the positive effect of early intervention initiatives.

There is also more evidence that points to the beneficial effects of early intervention programs. It has been found that children who attend education centers or participate in early childhood education programs on average perform better on initial math and reading assessments than children who did not participate in these initiatives. This gap continues through the early years of children's schooling and is more prominent among groups of students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Most social studies conducted regarding intervention programs find that inequality in early education leads to inequality in future ability, achievement, and adult success. Neurological studies have also found that negative psychosocial risks in early childhood affect the developing brain and a child's development. These studies concluded that reducing the effects of these negative risks and subsequent inequality requires targeted interventions to address specific risk factors, like education.