Education

Disclaimer: This topic can get dicey.  It is not my intent to disparage any group of people – this is based upon validated statistics and my own observations. There are, of course, exceptions to these statistics in both the North and the South. We all know of someone who succeeded after dropping out of school, and we all know of someone struggling with poverty after completing an advanced degree.

There is a lot of correlation between education and poverty. On average, the less education a person has, the less they earn over the course of their adult life. The US Census Bureau’s study on this relationship noted:
“Earnings increase with educational level. Average earnings ranged from $18,900 for high school dropouts to $25,900 for high school graduates, $45,400 for college graduates, and $99,300 for workers with professional degrees (M.D., J.D., D.D.S., or D.V.M.).  Each successively higher education level is associated with an increase in earnings.”

Yet poverty and poor educational attainment continue to plague the South overall. Southern states have reduced graduation rates both for high school and college. There are lower scores on reading and science, which indicates it is poorer quality of education in primary and secondary schools, not only kids dropping out who drive these statistics. Per-pupil spending is lower in the South, and poverty higher.  This is a pattern, but there is not necessarily a causal relationship.

Why is this? Nobody has a clear answer. Of course, per-pupil spending might increase quality and graduation rates, but because poverty rates are higher, where will the money come from? Are the people poor because of inadequate education, or is the lack of education preventing people from escaping poverty? It’s an endless circle.

Then there is the political side of things. I understand (and agree to an extent) that this nation cannot afford to raise everyone out of poverty. National programs cost billions and billions each year, but don’t have a significant impact at the local level. State and local school boards are supposed to know their people best – what is needed and how to fulfill that need. It’s obvious that a program which works in Montana or Maine may not work the same in Mississippi.  But continuing to vote against federal or state programs which “can” help seems to me to be against the best interests of the people.

It does not need to be this way, on the political side. Montana is a reliably Red state, so the philosophy of smaller government is similar to that of the South. Yet it has a much higher graduation rate and test scores, and lower poverty rates, with just a modest increase in per-pupil spending. Is the spending what causes the improvement? Or does the higher overall income allow the higher spend?

I don’t have the answers and I don’t know where to start. But we are not doing people any favors by allowing this pattern to continue.