Professor Chris Goodman, “Class in the Classroom: Poverty, Policies, and Practices Impeding Education” — Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law

April 4, 2019 | Professor Christine Chambers Goodman‘s article, “Class in the Classroom: Poverty, Policies, and Practices Impeding Education,” (SSRN) has been published in the Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law [27 J. Gender Soc. Pol’y & Law. 95 (2019)].  The article considers the issue of equally adequate education.

Abstract of “Class in the Classroom: Poverty, Policies, and Practices Impeding Education”

Part I of this Article begins with social science evidence to justify the combination approach of “equally adequate” education. It describes the data on the impact of SES on brain development. Part I also addresses the impacts of one’s physical environment, including the levels of poverty, crime, educational opportunity, housing, upward mobility, and stress in neighborhoods on educational outcomes. It then considers some potential counterarguments and poses questions that can guide social scientists in further research. Part II describes the constitutional protections for education and the state court litigation around those issues, concurring with the conclusion of others who believe that the key point of the constitutional right is to provide an education sufficient to participate in democratic processes of the nation. This section addresses the constitutional arguments around education and adequacy versus equality, recent cases putting forth these arguments, and their status. Part III briefly addresses the federal legislation, namely the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which has subsequently been revised and renamed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). To the extent data is available, this Article will examine how ESSA is working (relative to NCLB), as well as whether it is making progress for students in states who promote either equal or adequate education. Thus far, there is little data about application because the states only recently submitted their plans, and so this part focuses on the ESSA’s goals and shortfalls, and then looks at the plans put into place by several states. Part III will then highlight the adequacy and equality litigation currently and recently pending in selected states. The article concludes with several proposals for future consideration by courts, policymakers, and legislatures.