One of the most predominant advantages to education is its promotion of equal opportunity. Bloom confirms this atmosphere when he writes, “[Great thinkers] had authority not based on power, money, or family, but on natural gifts that properly compel respect”(Bloom 6). Privilege based on wealth holds no power behind the walls of a university, but Michaels proposes that inequality lies at the gates of universities. “What’s keeping [the poor] out of elite universities is not their inability to pay the bill, but their inability to qualify for admission in the first place”(Michaels 196). Most people assume that low-income families do not attend college because they cannot afford it. Universities respond to this outcry by claiming they will cover
…show more content…
Though it stands as an economic and time investment, the remainder life under employment will hold statistically better economic benefits. For low-income families universities do not always fit the norm. Though identity struggles internally within any cultural being, Goldschmidt believes that the “self is never complete,” and change is a part of life(Goldschmidt). Opportunities in the realm of education seem bleak when regarding economic standing, but the attitude of the low-income class stands as the biggest barrier. “There is required the excitement of curiosity, and self confidence derived from pride in the achievements of the surrounding society in procuring the advance of knowledge”(Whitehead 8). The answer to the dilemma for a student from a low-income family lies within his or her interpretation of his or her future. Education may seem a risk they cannot afford as certain fields of study lose significance, but it embodies a tool for change. Whether it be in meeting with people with influence or self-discovery or the affect of knowledge. Choosing the path of education means choosing a cultural shift, a time of inevitable struggle, and a time of potential greatness. Choosing to stay in the work force without a college education maintains cultural status, embodies the pleasure of staying in your comfort zone, and decreases economic security. Choosing one side of the dilemma over another involves self reflection and gauging the value in what future you would prefer, while remembering that the future in both circumstances cannot be
Though it stands as an economic and time investment, the remainder life under employment will hold statistically better economic benefits. For low-income families universities do not always fit the norm. Though identity struggles internally within any cultural being, Goldschmidt believes that the “self is never complete,” and change is a part of life(Goldschmidt). Opportunities in the realm of education seem bleak when regarding economic standing, but the attitude of the low-income class stands as the biggest barrier. “There is required the excitement of curiosity, and self confidence derived from pride in the achievements of the surrounding society in procuring the advance of knowledge”(Whitehead 8). The answer to the dilemma for a student from a low-income family lies within his or her interpretation of his or her future. Education may seem a risk they cannot afford as certain fields of study lose significance, but it embodies a tool for change. Whether it be in meeting with people with influence or self-discovery or the affect of knowledge. Choosing the path of education means choosing a cultural shift, a time of inevitable struggle, and a time of potential greatness. Choosing to stay in the work force without a college education maintains cultural status, embodies the pleasure of staying in your comfort zone, and decreases economic security. Choosing one side of the dilemma over another involves self reflection and gauging the value in what future you would prefer, while remembering that the future in both circumstances cannot be