The Civil Rights Act forbids discrimination on the basis of color, race, religion, national origin, or sex. Provisions of this Act forbade discrimination based on race and sex in hiring, promoting, and firing. This Act also prohibited discrimination in federally funded programs and public accommodations. It strengthened the desegregation of schools as well as the enforcement of voting rights too.

This Act is the country’s benchmark civil rights legislation, and it continues to resonate to date. Once the Act was passed, it put a stop to the application of “Jim Crow” laws, which had been upheld earlier by the Supreme Court in the Plessy v. Ferguson case (1896). In that case, the court decreed that racial segregation claimed to be “separate but equal” was legitimate. Congress ultimately expanded the Civil Rights Act to strengthen the enforcement of citizen’s fundamental civil rights.

Title IV of the Act prohibits discrimination in public schools based on color, race, religion, national origin, or sex. Public schools include secondary schools, elementary schools, and public universities and colleges. But it was a decade later when the legal framework for anti-discrimination laws concerning public school students was laid.

The Civil Rights Act (1964) also made school desegregation a much easier process. This forced schools to stop segregation because the consequence of not doing so would be to lose funding. This significantly reduced the number of segregated schools in the U.S. and established federal criteria that were used to evaluate schools to detect any form of segregation. Schools that were discovered to be in noncompliance were forced to participate in desegregation plans.

Although the Act was quite effective in reducing segregation, it did not change how the staff and students in formerly white-only schools felt about having African-American students in their schools. This has continued in many ways to this day, and though things are noticeably better, the effects of racism and segregation still linger.

The post The Civil Rights Act of 1964: Everything You Need to Know appeared first on The Edvocate.

However, the sad truth is that the college degree attainment gap between Whites and Minorities is getting worse, not better. Despite some progress in recent years, the educational divide between racial and ethnic groups remains wide, persistent, and troubling.

According to the latest data from the National Center for Education Statistics, in 2019, 57 percent of Whites aged 25-29 had attained at least an associate degree, compared to only 34 percent of Blacks, 26 percent of Hispanics, and 39 percent of Asians. These disparities are even more pronounced at the bachelor’s and graduate levels, where Whites are overrepresented and Minorities are underrepresented in almost every field, from STEM to business to the arts.

African Americans and Hispanics are particularly underrepresented in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields, which are increasingly in demand and pay well. Data from the National Science Foundation shows that while Blacks and Hispanics make up over 30 percent of the U.S. population but account for only 20 percent of STEM degrees awarded each year. In contrast, Whites make up 63 percent of the population but earn 70 percent of STEM degrees.

Moreover, these gaps are not just limited to higher education but start early in the educational pipeline, from preschool to high school. Minorities are more likely to attend underfunded and under-resourced schools, experience higher rates of discipline and suspension, and encounter systemic and implicit biases that hinder their academic performance and potential.

What are the causes of these disparities, and what can be done to address them? The root causes are multifactorial and complex and involve social, economic, cultural, and policy factors. For instance, Minorities are more likely to live in poverty, have single-parent households, face high rates of crime and violence, and lack access to quality healthcare, housing, and transportation.

The educational system itself is also to blame, as it perpetuates and reinforces systemic inequities, biases, and prejudices that manifest in the form of tracking, standardized tests, teacher qualifications, and curriculum. Additionally, Minority students frequently face challenges in blending their multiple identities such as being first generations, immigrants, and bilingual that further exacerbates their struggles.

To close the college degree attainment gap, we need a comprehensive and collaborative approach that addresses these underlying systemic issues from a social justice perspective. We need to invest in early childhood education and early intervention programs, increase the quality and diversity of teachers and school leaders, increase financial supports to students of color, and create policies that champion diversity and inclusion in higher education.

We need to look beyond individualistic solutions that place the burden solely on the shoulders of students and their families, and instead recognize the need for systemic change that empowers diverse voices and perspectives to thrive. We need to recognize differences and provide support without trying to homogenize these underrepresented groups and refrain from stereotyping them.

The college degree attainment gap between Whites and Minorities is a symptom of a larger problem- the racial and social injustice that pervades our society. Until we address these broader issues, we cannot truly close the gap, ensure that all students have equal opportunities to pursue their dreams, and create an equitable and just society for all.    

The post The College Degree Attainment Gap Between Whites and Minorities is Getting Worse appeared first on The Edvocate.

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, as of 2018, only 42% of Hispanic and 35% of Black Americans aged 18 to 24 were enrolled in college, as opposed to 56% of Whites. Furthermore, in the fall of 2017, the gap between entry rates of White and Black students was 21%, up from 16% in 1996. Similarly, the gap between the entry rates of White and Hispanic students was 24% in 2017, up from 13% in 1996.

Various factors are contributing to this growing gap. Firstly, the disparities in pre-college education for minority students are significant, with fewer resources in poorly-funded schools, and higher dropout rates leaving them less prepared for college. These students do not often have access to tutoring or advanced placement classes, leading to lowered proficiency in mathematics and reading.

Secondly, minority students are more likely to come from low-income families that cannot afford the high costs associated with college attendance. The cost of college is increasing faster than the rate of inflation, and the student debt burden is relatively higher in these communities. Even with financial aid, minority students are more likely to need to work a part-time job and often cannot afford to take unpaid internships or participate in extracurricular activities that would otherwise enhance their college applications.

Lastly, strains from negative social factors make it difficult for minority students to stay the course once they have enrolled in college. Minority students may face institutional racism, social injustices, and may feel alienated in predominantly white academic institutions. This isolation can lead to feelings of discouragement or lack of motivation to continue with their studies.

The consequences of this growing gap are severe. By 2045, non-Whites in the United States will become the majority, and the country will be greatly disadvantaged if it fails to address the educational disparity gap between racial groups. Lower college attendance rates among black and Hispanic students can be seen as a significant contributor to the income gap in the United States, perpetuating the cycles of poverty that have affected these communities for generations.

In conclusion, while possible solutions to this issue may involve better funding for poorly funded schools, providing increased financial aid options and grants for minority students, and supporting mentoring programs, it is essential to address systemic inequities to create a more inclusive higher education system. Efforts should concentrate on providing equal and accessible opportunities for wealthy and non-wealthy students to enroll, succeed, and graduate college, regardless of race. Unless action is taken, the gap between minority and white college attendance will continue to widen, resulting in dire implications for the U.S. economy and society as a whole.    

The post The College Attendance Gap Between Whites and Minorities is Getting Worse appeared first on The Edvocate.

Here are some ways education leaders can respond to anti-Black rhetoric:

1. Speak Out Against Anti-Black Rhetoric

Education leaders must recognize that silence is complicit in perpetuating anti-Black rhetoric and discrimination. Leaders must speak out against anti-Black rhetoric and actively engage in conversations with students, teachers, parents, and the community to promote anti-racism. Leaders should use their platforms to raise awareness about the impact of anti-Black rhetoric and to educate individuals on how it contributes to inequality.

2. Promote Diversity and Inclusion

Education leaders must ensure that their schools are inclusive and reflect the diversity of the community. Leaders should promote diversity by recruiting and hiring teachers and staff from diverse backgrounds, offering multicultural curriculum, and encouraging participation in multicultural events and activities. Leaders must also ensure that students feel safe and welcomed in classrooms and on campus.

3. Cultivate an Anti-Racist Environment

Education leaders must create a culture of anti-racism in their schools, where individuals stand up against racism and discrimination. Leaders should provide training and professional development opportunities for staff, teachers, and students on anti-racism. Leaders must also ensure that the curriculum is inclusive of Black history and culture and that textbooks and reading materials do not perpetuate stereotypes.

4. Encourage Empathy and Understanding

Education leaders must encourage empathy and understanding among students and staff. Leaders should teach students about the experiences of Black people in America and their contributions to society. Leaders must also create opportunities for constructive dialogue about race and racism and teach students how to seek out and listen to diverse perspectives.

In conclusion, education leaders must take action to respond to anti-Black rhetoric. Leaders should speak out against rhetoric, promote diversity, cultivate an anti-racist environment, and encourage empathy and understanding. By taking these actions, education leaders can create safer, more inclusive, and equitable schools for all students.  

The post How Education Leaders Can Respond to Anti-Black Rhetoric appeared first on The Edvocate.

1. To ensure equal opportunities – On the global stage, women still face discrimination that restricts their access to education, healthcare, employment, and fair wages. In many countries, traditional gender roles perpetuate the notion that women should stay at home, bear children, and remain subordinate to men. These attitudes and beliefs are not only unjust but hold back societies from achieving their full potential. By advocating for gender equity, we can ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed regardless of gender.

2. To address systemic sexism and biases – Gender equity is not just about establishing equal rights; it is also about dismantling existing biases, cultural practices, and social attitudes that hold women back. For instance, the bias against hiring women in technical or leadership positions, assumes that they lack the necessary skills or capabilities. Despite studies showing that gender-diverse teams fare better on several key performance indicators, there is still a prevalent belief that women are less competent or serious than men. Gender equity aims to correct these injustices that are often steeped in cultural traditions and norms.

3. To inspire younger generations – Promoting gender equity is an excellent way to inspire and empower the next generation of young women to dream big, challenge the status quo, and break the glass ceiling. Young girls growing up in societies where women do not have equal opportunities to men may not even be aware of their potential. Gender equity helps to re-educate them and show them that they can aspire to any career or life ambition that they choose.

4. To create a fair and more equitable society – Ultimately, promoting gender equity is about building a fair and just society. When women have equal opportunities and their rights are respected, they can contribute fully to economic, social, and political systems. A gender-equitable society is more likely to be peaceful, prosperous, and respectful of human rights.

In conclusion, the fight for gender equity is one that will not end anytime soon. We need to continuously educate ourselves, listen to women’s voices, work against unfair systems and practices, and speak up for gender equity. As gender equity champion Serena Williams said, “we must continue to dream big, encourage each other, and work together towards creating a more equal world.”     

The post Why I Champion Gender Equity appeared first on The Edvocate.

The concept of social justice education has its roots in the civil rights movement, feminist movement, and other social movements of the 1960s and 1970s. These movements highlighted the pervasive inequalities that existed in society and demanded that the educational system address them. Educators began to recognize the need for a more inclusive and equitable model of education that would help to create a more socially just society. As a result, social justice education emerged as a powerful tool to promote equality and social justice through education.

Social justice education emphasizes the importance of subjecting students to different experiences, perspectives, and values. It facilitates their understanding of cultural, economic, political, social, and environmental diversity. This educational model draws from a variety of disciplines, including history, sociology, political science, and the arts, to equip students with the critical thinking skills and knowledge they need to recognize and understand injustices, as well as the tools to work to remedy them.

One of the key components of social justice education is the emphasis on experiential learning. This type of learning allows students to engage in real-world experiences that foster their understanding of social justice issues. For example, students might volunteer in a community organization, participate in a protest, or organize a social justice event. By engaging in these experiences, students develop a deeper understanding of the complexities of social justice and the role they can play in promoting it.

Another important aspect of social justice education is the creation of a safe and inclusive space for dialogue and debate. This space allows students to express their ideas freely and to engage in respectful conversations about social justice topics. It provides opportunities for students to challenge their own assumptions and biases and to learn from one another.

Social justice education aims to promote equity and social justice and is grounded in recognition of historical and systemic oppressions that affect the most marginalized in our society. Through addressing these difficult but necessary issues, this educational approach aims to empower students to advocate for themselves and for others, to work towards representational democracy and build a better world for all.

In conclusion, social justice education is an educational model that aims to promote equity and social justice by addressing systemic inequalities that exist in our society. It builds critical thinking and renders students capable of advocacy for fairness and the representation of all without bias. This educational philosophy enables students to create meaningful changes in their communities, effect positive change in society and address the root causes of social injustice. It assuages social disparities and prejudices and offers a comprehensive approach to teaching about history and our collective future.   

The post What Is Social Justice Education? appeared first on The Edvocate.

The court’s ruling was based on its decision that any form of separation was unequal and in direct opposition to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. States were instructed to assimilate all ethnic backgrounds into public schools and removed laws that enforced segregation in other facilities.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka discarded the “separate but equal” policy as advanced by the Supreme Court in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). According to this ruling, laws mandating separate public facilities for African Americans and whites don’t defy the equal protection clause if the amenities are just about equal. But the 1954 decision made the law inapplicable to public education. Although the ruling strictly applied just to public schools, it meant that segregation wasn’t permissible in other public facilities. Regarded as one of the most significant rulings in the court’s history, the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka case helped motivate the American civil rights movement of the late 1950s and ‘60s. 

The consequence of Brown v. Board of Education cannot be exaggerated. The case was sponsored by the NAACP, with heavy influence from Du Bois. The case was brought up because of the complaint of an African American father whose daughter was forced to travel a mile and a half every day to get to school when there was an all-white school available a couple of blocks away from her home.

There were four other cases presented along with the Brown hearing. The counsel of the plaintiff was none other than Thurgood Marshall, a man who would eventually become a Supreme Court justice. The decision to outlaw segregation shocked the entire country, and it was largely due to the influence of Chief Justice Earl Warren.

Since the Supreme Court expected opposition to its ruling, particularly in the southern states, it didn’t give directions for the immediate implementation. Instead, it asked all the attorney generals of those states that had laws allowing segregation in their public schools to submit plans for ways to proceed with desegregation. It was on May 31, 1955, when the Justices finally handed down a plan for desegregation.

The post Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka: Everything You Need to Know appeared first on The Edvocate.

The Little Rock Nine became the center of the struggle to desegregate public schools in the U.S., particularly in the South. These students were recruited by Daisy Bates, president of the Arkansas branch of the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Martin Luther King, who was then the president of the Montgomery Improvement Association, wrote to President Eisenhower requesting a speedy resolution to permit these students to attend school.

The initial years that the students spent at Central High were quite tumultuous. This was because the educational standards at white-only schools were much more demanding than what they were accustomed to, and they also faced constant bullying and abuse from their peers and teachers. On the first day of school (September 4, 1957), a white mob assembled in front of the school. In addition, the Arkansas National Guard was deployed by Governor Orval Faubus to prevent the black students from entering the school. To counter Faubus’ action, a team of NAACP lawyers won a federal district court injunction, which prevented the governor from blocking the students’ entry. On September 23, 1957, the students entered the school using a side entrance with the help of police escorts. However, fearing rising mob violence, they were sent home soon afterward. The Little Rock incident was becoming an international embarrassment, which Eisenhower realized. As a result, he reluctantly ordered troops from the 101^st Airborne Division to protect the students. The Little Rock Nine was shielded by federal troops as well as the Arkansas National Guard for the rest of the school year.

Despite all these incidents, the courage of these students did not break. They continued to bear their oppression and faced their education with all diligence and perseverance. Ernest Green, one of the students, became the first African-American to graduate from Central High. He later worked as the Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Affairs under Jimmy Carter. In 1999, he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. 

The post The Little Rock Nine: Everything You Need to Know appeared first on The Edvocate.

Quite sadly, we need to recognize that education policy in this country has a poor history of true educational equity, with glaring commitments that prevent these bodies from making it a priority. The present educational equity structure is replete with several gaps and issues that must be addressed if there would be progress – no matter how insurmountable those challenges appear.

There is also the matter of political correctness that is hard to attain with this kind of duty. Nonetheless, if the educational system must rise to the ideals portrayed by fundamental American qualities and principles, this hard work must be done.

According to the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), equity in education appears with two closely intertwined dimensions. These include:

Fairness: It means ensuring that social and personal obstacles aren’t obstacles to achieving educational potential. It bans discrimination based on ethnic origin, gender, or socioeconomic status.

Inclusion: It makes sure a basic minimum standard of education for everyone. For instance, all should be able to read, write, and perform simple arithmetic. If some students require more to get there, they should obtain it.

Educational leaders should take robust steps to introduce equity into their classrooms and schools. The following approaches may change teaching dynamics and better outcomes for pupils of all backgrounds.

Personalized learning: Educators have to develop the skills to comprehend pupils’ individual needs to excel academically. This typically necessitates implementing individualized lesson plans and advocating for individual pupils who might need tailored educational opportunities or resources.

Cultural responsiveness: Culturally responsive teaching is an important skill that all teachers have to implement within their classrooms. Pupils from diverse cultural backgrounds should be provided with a safe environment in which to learn.

Early intervention: Providing dedicated, personalized support at an early stage in the process is key to achieving educational equity. Early intervention may substantially impact a student’s future success by helping to foster strengths and develop crucial skills for overcoming challenges.

Community engagement: Education goes beyond the classroom and into the homes of students and communities. Educators should engage communities and families in the learning process. This will motivate diverse voices to review and rectify system inequities, further improving educational equity for all pupils.

The post Educational Equity: Everything You Need to Know appeared first on The Edvocate.

There are most gaps and problems in the current system that desperately need to be addressed. Needless to say, it’s a daunting task. And it’s sometimes politically difficult. But it is an important component of ensuring that the educational system reflects core American values, principles, and promises.

So if education technology is going to be a significant player in the educational arena, then education technology needs to think about equity. In other words, education technology company leaders should lead with equity in mind. They need to ensure that their products meet the needs of learners from a variety of learner populations. They must ensure that their products are not considered as low-cost substitutes for quality teaching. They must focus on the needs of each individual learner.

Ideally, education technology leaders should think of equity not as a box to check to be appealing to those stakeholders who are making buying decisions but instead as part of the ethical commitments of their business model. It may require providing more resources to the “ed” side and less to the “tech” side to ensure that materials are created by and vetted by experts in the field of educational equity.

It may mean creating software that can be used by learners whose first language is not English or designing an app easily used by a kid with a cognitive disability. It may require developing cultural competence for various communities to ensure that education technology products are appropriate for the full range of learners. It may not be easy, but it is consistent with the obligations of working in the education field, and it is necessary for the future success of society as a whole. 

It’s a complicated task that requires expertise in several fields. Fortunately, various groups can aid your efforts.

The post Why Education Technology Business Leaders Should Lead with Equity in Mind appeared first on The Edvocate.