In Jay MacLeod’s Ain’t No Makin’ It, lack of motivation and lack of opportunity limit two different groups of boys in the projects of Clarendon Heights: the Hallway Hangers and the Brothers. MacLeod observes these groups in his case study starting in the early 1980s when most of the boys were still in high school and through their adulthood. Starting in the early 2000s and continuing through today, STEM - science, technology, engineering, and math - education achieved popularity in the educational sphere because it is seen as a way to increase U.S. innovational output as well as create diversity in the white and Asian male dominant STEM career field by seeking inclusion of females, minorities, and lower socioeconomic youth in STEM education.
…show more content…
The cultural milieu, various aspects of life that influence a person’s identity and beliefs, surrounding the Hallway Hangers created a common habitus, embodied beliefs and tendencies resulting from cultural milieu. Their families’ records of low educational attainment, lack of career success, and long time of residence in Clarendon Heights contributed to the Hallway Hangers’ negative habitus of distrust and pessimism about the future and about the system of economic success in the U.S.. Thus, the Hallway Hangers would be more likely to succeed with a policy that could change their habitus and lead them to see the economic system as more meritocratic. Educate to Innovate’s media and television campaign to promote STEM, especially for underrepresented groups, could potentially provide a more positive image on the STEM field. However, the Hallway Hangers specifically need to see people just a disadvantaged as themselves succeed in STEM in order to undergo any change of attitude. If the change of attitude is successful and the Hallway Hangers are willing and able to work for success, then they can benefit from the programs the Brothers could also benefit …show more content…
The initiative seeks to include underrepresented groups and women to diversify the STEM field, and it also increases STEM opportunities most available to those with financial stability. Competitions, curriculums, extracurricular programs, higher education programs, and more are most likely to benefit those who can afford to spend their time and money on them. Thus, the bulk of the Educate to Innovate programming would benefit those with the best access to effective programs, teachers, and resources: the middle and upper classes. Although the lowest classes could reap some benefits from the initiative, these are bounded compared to the benefits received by the middle and upper classes. Thus, the Educate to Innovate initiative can yield absolute success for all classes, yet relative success is not equitable, failing to reduce economic
The cultural milieu, various aspects of life that influence a person’s identity and beliefs, surrounding the Hallway Hangers created a common habitus, embodied beliefs and tendencies resulting from cultural milieu. Their families’ records of low educational attainment, lack of career success, and long time of residence in Clarendon Heights contributed to the Hallway Hangers’ negative habitus of distrust and pessimism about the future and about the system of economic success in the U.S.. Thus, the Hallway Hangers would be more likely to succeed with a policy that could change their habitus and lead them to see the economic system as more meritocratic. Educate to Innovate’s media and television campaign to promote STEM, especially for underrepresented groups, could potentially provide a more positive image on the STEM field. However, the Hallway Hangers specifically need to see people just a disadvantaged as themselves succeed in STEM in order to undergo any change of attitude. If the change of attitude is successful and the Hallway Hangers are willing and able to work for success, then they can benefit from the programs the Brothers could also benefit …show more content…
The initiative seeks to include underrepresented groups and women to diversify the STEM field, and it also increases STEM opportunities most available to those with financial stability. Competitions, curriculums, extracurricular programs, higher education programs, and more are most likely to benefit those who can afford to spend their time and money on them. Thus, the bulk of the Educate to Innovate programming would benefit those with the best access to effective programs, teachers, and resources: the middle and upper classes. Although the lowest classes could reap some benefits from the initiative, these are bounded compared to the benefits received by the middle and upper classes. Thus, the Educate to Innovate initiative can yield absolute success for all classes, yet relative success is not equitable, failing to reduce economic