Resources should be for every student not just the few who have money

Within Academic Profiling. Latinos, Asian Americans, and the Achievement Gap,  Gilda Ochoa touches upon the lives of the students who attend Southern California High School. Ochoa specifies on the racism implemented and other obstacles that minority students face within their everyday lives at the high school. 

In Academic Profiling, Ochoa breaks up the students into groups from which the school categorizes them they are separated into different levels of teaching and an education based solely on ethnic backgrounds and their family’s finances. However in reality, for a better education and all-around personal structure, the education these categorized students receive should be based on their personal learning level and schooling history. Rebecca Ramos explains, “This system sorts, divides, and treats students disparately, fueling their separation and the feeling of being different and unequal” (Academic Profiling).

Ochoa talks of another ‘category’ created by Southern California High School which is one centered on race and bias, if you’re of Asian descent of course your smart, and if you’re a Latino/a, then of course your somewhat slower and need a little more preparation for life in education. Generally the Asian Americans, middle-class and upper-middle class students are placed into International Baccalaureate (IB), honors (H), and advanced placement courses.  However, the Latinas/os and working-class students are placed in non-honors courses, which are classified as college preparatory, otherwise known as the lower level classes that feel the racism and discrimination more heavily.  Ochoa recites that having these separations right at the beginning of high school creates the idea that “students are funneled into a system of inequality and competition where their peer groups are disparately and separately formed” (Academic Profiling). 

Even if students have high-test skills and learn faster or easier than others they are not always placed in the correct education level.  A Latino student talks about how she “could be smarter than them, and they wouldn’t even notice” (Academic Profiling, pg. 59) referring to the school board because of the major focus on Asian Americans.  Another instance was when one student who was placed in College prep classes because of her ethnicity, she decided to go up a few levels and learn at a level that she would benefit and prevail in.  Consequently the teacher did not welcome her in but ask why she was in her class and that she must have been lost.  Even when the students of this High School muster the courage to switch classes and have the means and skills to partake in them, they get isolated and receive poor treatment because of racism and academic profiling.

Heather Gautney agrees, in her article Invitation to a Dialogue: Unequal Schooling, believing that “education is the great opportunity equalizer” (Invitation). Gautney goes on to express what Ochoa similarly does within Academic Profiling that “the reality of our “make or break” education system is that race and social class largely determine the quality of one’s educational life, from pre-K to graduate school” (Invitation).  Both expressing that rather than education being a divider it could be a source of equality and impartiality amongst students.  Even in “global cities” public schools are still majorly segregated.  This is thought to have come about because of “housing and rapid rates of gentrification” and the “slow repeal of public policy focused on school integration in favor of privatization, accountability schemes and school choice” (Invitation). 

“School choice” even though it sounds like it is a choice does not really live up to its expectations.  For many Americans the choice is only prevalent when the household’s finances are up to par with being able to choose a school which they can afford besides the general public school that is offered.  In this case the “school choice” is only given to the students who are able to afford it.  Yes it is strategically and educationally correct for students to be able to have smaller classes and more resources for learning, Gautney conveys, but it should be that way for all students not just the few who have money.  She elucidates on the fact “education is a microcosm of a host of problems linked to social inequality. In the United States, “public” has come to signify the bottom of the barrel” (Invitation).  (I’d provide a quick sentence or two in agreement to the quote you just put, more stable in the sense of format for this piece.)

Ochoa describes and depicts on the achievement gap, “a common frame in today’s discussion about education that there is “an achievement gap” based on race/ethnicity” (Academic Profiling). Gautney and Ochoa explore why and how unequal schooling affects the lives of too many people and why there is still an achievement gap in the education provided today. In my opinion, the standards and expectations are explicitly laid out for these students and even the surrounding public to see. However, the effect of Academic Profiling has paid a large toll on the performance by these students (the minorities). They are the ones who do not have any expectations to live up to, unlike the majority, and most of these students will not even try to pass by them or create further educational goals than what is the norm for his/her culture.   

·      Gautney, Heather. "Invitation to a Dialogue: Unequal Schooling." The New York Times. The New York Times, 21 Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Oct. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/22/opinion/invitation-to-a-dialogue-unequal-schooling.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Aw%2C%7B%222%22%3A%22RI%3A13%22%7D&_r=0>.

·      Ochoa, Gilda L. 1965- Author. Academic Profiling. Latinos, Asian Americans, and the Achievement Gap. Minneapolis, MN: U of Minnesota, 2013. Print.