Disparities in Access to Education between Rural and Metropolitan Areas

Introduction

            The subject of disparities in education has been widely explored by researchers in terms of gender and socioeconomic statuses, and quality of education. However, little has been done with regard to disparities stemming from geographical factors and associated variables such as urbanization (Byun, Meece & Irvin 2012). At present, the rural-urban disparity with respect to access to education is trending downwards; nevertheless, the gap is still clear (Teese, Lamb & Duru-Bellat 2007). The expansion of admission to universities and colleges and urbanization has played an instrumental role in reducing the gap in terms of access to education in both rural and urban areas (Holsinger & Jacob 2009; Sneh, Randhir & Sneh 2003). Does this directly translate to the view that opening up more universities and colleges will result in higher access to education and reduce illiteracy? There are more underlying issues related to social conditions that need to be explored in order to adopt an effective education policy to address the rural-urban disparity in access to education. Potential examples of underlying issues could include differential poverty rates, differential standards of living, and retention issues (Whyte 2010). In the light of this view, this study aims to explore the underlying reasons why the young rural and regional people are not accessing education at the same levels as their counterparts in metropolitan areas.

Research Purpose

            The main aim of this research is to perform a comparative study regarding the situational and conceptual differences regarding the access to education between metropolitan areas, and rural and regional areas in order to highlight the factors contributing to less educational opportunities in the rural and regional areas compared to metropolitan areas. In order to achieve this aim, this study seeks to achieve the following objectives

1.  To conduct an analysis of the characteristics of disparities existing between urban and rural areas;
2. To identify problems the social and economic issues that are unique to the rural population that hinder their access to education;
3. To identify the differences in educational opportunities between metropolitan and rural areas;
4. To provide recommendations through which the government can adopt effective measures to address this disparity.

Research Questions

            The aforementioned objectives have been crafted in broad terms; however, their substance is articulated in precise terms using the research questions to be addressed by the study. They include:

1. What is the nature of the current urban-rural disparity with regard to access to educational opportunities?
2. What are the differential social conditions between urban and rural areas that create this disparity in access to education?
3. What are the differences in terms of educational opportunities between rural and metropolitan areas?
4. What social factors are unique to rural population such as socioeconomic status and family income and structure, which affect the enrollment of students in both rural and metropolitan schools?

Brief Review of Literature

            Several studies have attempted to examine the various factors contributing to disparities in access to education although they placed emphasis on gender and ethnic variables. Little research has been undertaken to perceive disparities in access to education in the light of the differences between metropolitan and rural settings (Byun, Meece & Irvin 2012; Sharma 2004). The inner city schools usually receive a lot of attention from policy makers compared to the schools in rural areas regardless of the fact that rural schools in the US provide education to about 33 percent of the public school students and are faced with similar challenges that their metropolitan counterparts face (Whyte 2010). A study by Byun, Meece & Irvin (2012) attempted to highlight the factors that are likely to influence the differences in terms of degree attainment and college enrollment among metropolitan and rural youths. Byun, Meece & Irvin (2012) performed an analysis of about 9,000 students on data obtained from the National Educational Longitudinal Study and reported that the youth in rural areas suffer from high poverty rates and have limited access to counseling resources and college prep sessions when compared to the youth in metropolitan areas. In addition, the study reported that the parents of rural youth are less educated; as a result, they are less likely to motivate their children to enroll in college and further their education. Byun, Meece & Irvin (2012) also reported that students in metropolitan areas are more than twice as likely to attain a bachelor’s degree compared to students in rural areas.

In another study by Pink & Noblit (2008) to explore the urban-rural disparity in access to education, the findings pointed out that family income played an instrumental role in predicting college enrollment for the case of students in metropolitan areas. On the contrary, college enrollment in the rural areas was primarily predicted by family structure. Moore (2001) explored this disparity in terms of parental expectations and involvement between metropolitan and rural students. Moore (2001) reported a considerable difference between parental expectations in rural and metropolitan areas, whereby rural parents had less educational expectations and involvement in the education of their children than the parents in metropolitan areas; this is because rural parents have fewer bachelor’s degrees. With regard to this finding, Moore (2001) noted that this places students in the rural areas at a disadvantage when compared to urban students basing on the predisposition that parental expectations and involvement are some of the positive predictors for college admittance, retention, and completing studies. In explaining the factors resulting in the disparity, Holsinger & Jacob (2009) attributed the lower levels of degree completion and college admittance in rural areas to their relatively lower socioeconomic background when compared to the students in metropolitan areas.

Overview of the Research Methodology

            The research question and context often determined the research methodology adopted in a study (Fisher 2007). Social research has the primary objective of elucidating the current state of affairs using a predetermined set of variables; this means that social research should place a substantial emphasis on findings together with a comparison of the existing conceptual and empirical frameworks to elucidate the current topic under study (Fowler 2009). In the light of this view, this study will make use of both qualitative and quantitative data. It is evident that the study will require an analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data regarding to differences in access to education in rural and metropolitan areas. Therefore, the study will integrate both qualitative and quantitative research design, with the data acquisition methods primary sources.

The study will deploy a comparative research method to analyze the differences in factors that contribute to the disparities in access to education between rural and metropolitan areas. In the light of this view, the research will compare both qualitative and quantitative data obtained from the rural and metropolitan settings in order to identify any factors that are directly related to the disparity in access to education.

The setting for this research will comprises of one rural and one metropolitan setting, wherein interviews and questionnaires will be used as the primary data acquisition method. The respondent will be selected randomly in these settings and will comprise mostly of parents and youth students in both settings. Questionnaires will be used to provide first-hand data from the members of both rural and urban settings regarding a myriad of factors that are likely to affect access to educational opportunities in their respective settings (Laurel 2003). The choice of questionnaires as a primary data collection method is that it will allow the researcher to gather enormous amounts of data in a small timeframe. Fundamentally, the questionnaire will comprise of structured questions and open ended questions for respondents. The study aims to collect about 500 questionnaires from each settings; this will guarantee the reliability of the data collected (Nardi 2003). On the other hand, interviews will be conducted particularly with educators from both rural and metropolitan settings to provide an in-depth understanding of the underlying factors that are resulting to the urban-rural disparity in access to education.

With regard to data analysis, the study will make use of both inferential and descriptive analysis in an attempt to answer the research questions and meet the study objectives. Descriptive statistics will be used to describe and summarize data using statistical measures such as percentage of youths enrolling to college and the mean family income (Neuman & Kreuger 2006). Inferential statistics will be used in making generalizations of the findings and will involve the use of statistical tests such as standard deviations and chi-square among other tests. After summarizing a describing data, a comparative analysis will be performed to spot the factors contributing to the disparity in access to education between rural and metropolitan areas.

Ethical Considerations

            It is imperative for a social research to take into account any underlying legal and ethical concerns associated with the study. In the light of this view, the following ethical concerns will be taken into account:

1. The principle of voluntary participation: This requires that no responded will be coerced to take part in the study; therefore, questionnaires will be disseminated to participants only after their consent to participate in the study has been confirmed. This principle will also apply to interviews (Ritchie & Lewis 2003).
2. Preserving the anonymity and confidentiality of respondents: This requires the research to guarantee the anonymity and confidentiality of respondents; therefore, the information gathered will not be disclosed to any irrespective of the circumstances.
3. The study guarantees no harm to respondents and researchers before, during and after the study; therefore, this research will not place respondents and participants in an uncomfortable and/or harmful situation in the course of their involvement in the research (Neuman & Kreuger 2006).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References List

Byun, S, Meece, J & Irvin, M 2012, ‘Rural-Nonrural Disparities in Postsecondary Educational Attainment Revisited’, American Educational Research Journal, vol 49, no. 3, pp. 412-437.

Fisher, C 2007, Researching and writing a dissertation , Pearson Education Limited, Edinburgh.

Fowler, C 2009, Survey research methods, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Holsinger, D & Jacob, J 2009, Inequality in Education: Comparative and International Perspectives, Springer, London.

Laurel, B 2003, Design research: methods and perspectives, MIT Press, New York.

Moore, R 2001, The Hidden America: Social Problems in Rural America for the Twenty-First Century, Susque-hanna University Press, Selinsgrove, PA.

Nardi, P 2003, Doing survey research- A guide to quantitative method, Pearson Education Inc, Boston.

Neuman, W & Kreuger, L 2006, Social work research methods with research navigator, Allyn & Bacon, New York.

Pink, W & Noblit, G 2008, International Handbook of Urban Education, Springer, London.

Ritchie, J & Lewis, J 2003, Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers, Sage Publications, London.

Sharma, RK 2004, Urban Sociology, Atlantic Publishers & Dist, New Delhi, india.

Sneh, S, Randhir, SS & Sneh, S 2003, Rural–urban Divide: Changing Spatial Pattern of Social Variables, Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi.

Teese, R, Lamb, S & Duru-Bellat, M 2007, International Studies in Educational Inequality, Theory and Policy, Springer, London.

Whyte, M 2010, One Country, Two Societies: Rural-Urban Inequality in Contemporary China, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.