Inequality in Public school systemInequalities exist in schools mainly because education and financial resources are unfairly distributed between wealthy and low-income neighborhoods. The quality of education has deteriorated in schools located low-income neighborhoods and students from these schools tend to underperform. As a result, students from these schools either don’t pursue college or end up in low-paying jobs. The is a vicious cycle of inequalities that these students get sucked into, and it will take a good great effort to escape the cycle. Special efforts must be carried out to make up for the injustices. Studies have shown that if resources are evenly distributed based on need without bias, the schools in low-income neighborhoods can indeed do well. A public school should never have unfairly distributed funding between wealth and low-income schools. Even in the worst neighborhood when it comes to school they shouldn’t be any different towards funding like any other schools. Therefore if they’re going to make some cuts the board should do that to every school. As Jordan Kranzler states in his piece on brown political review, A New Look at School Funding Inequality, “School funding in Pennsylvania is so unequal that the state nearly turned its entire tax system upside down trying to fix the situation not long ago. In an attempt to fix a system where per-pupil spending in low-income districts is 33 percent lower than in high-income school districts, Pennsylvania’s state legislature almost completely abolished the state’s school property tax and replaced it with increased income and sales taxes.” In other states as well, the role of property taxes in school funding formulas has become a point of tension, both in state legislatures and court systems. Unlike most other developed countries, the United States funds public schools through taxes on local wealth — chiefly, property taxes. While states vary in their funding methods, local taxes account for nearly half of public school funding in the United States. This funding system creates great disparities between wealthy districts with large property tax bases and poor districts, which lack this kind of local wealth. This is why the United States needs to radically change its method of administering property taxes to increase equity between school districts. Jessica Parisi was a Juris doctor and getting a master’s degree in education leadership at Penn State University, for the first time she visited a low-income area for a volunteer project she was stunned. The school that she went to had a lot of problems and lacked essentials:classrooms with broken windows, not enough water fountains with safe drinking water.  When Crystal Stryker interviewed Jessica said “I could not believe that the kids in these schools were being held to the same academic standards as the kids in the neighboring well-funded suburban schools, when many of them were coming to school without even having their basic needs met,” she said. Jessica’s experience with low-income students convinced her to make her life’s work in correcting education policies. The next step was deciding how to get there. As soon as she finished her degree in political science at the University of Pennsylvania, she chose Penn State Dickinson School of Law for the opportunity to earn a joint degree in law and education. The solution to this situation is simple. We need to balanced the funding, both through litigation in state courts and legislative policy. It needs to focus on decreasing school reliance on property tax revenue. That way States would be able to redistribute the funding from the wealthiest districts to the poorest districts. This way, schools in the low-income areas would not have to suffer as much from low property tax. of Economic research Studies have shown that if resources are evenly distributed based on need without bias, the schools in low-income neighborhoods can indeed do well. In order to lift the performance of the schools in poorer neighborhoods, more funding must be allocated to these schools to beef up their school resources. When more resources are available, special curriculums can be designed to help these underperformed students. Besides academic improvement, students can be mentored and introduced to role models so that they have an idea what they want to be when they grow up. To make it complete, parent engagement is also important to the success of the schools as well as the student themselves. Another positive result most studies have found positive results from increased school funding. For example, one working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research found “That increasing low-income pupil spending by 20 percent achieved graduation rates 23 percent higher.” An alternate solution inspired by John H. Jackson, president of the Schott Foundation for Public Education, and Pedro Noguera, the Peter L. Agnew professor of education at New York University. As the first step, New York State must bring back the funding for education equity that was cut greatly over the past two years. Recent cuts have undermined the ruling in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit that the state must provide a “Sound basic education” to all children. At the same time, the city’s Department of Education should direct additional resources to schools based on student needs. Schools serving children from homes with fewer resources should receive significantly more per-student funding than those serving students in wealthier neighborhoods. Every kindergarten student should take the gifted-and-talented program test to identify talent at an early age. Similarly, all middle schools should offer the courses necessary for the Specialized High Schools Admissions Test. Tutoring should be offered to low-income students so they can do their best on these crucial gatekeeper exams.Finally, every school should conduct an “opportunity audit” to determine if they are offering each student a fair and substantive opportunity to learn. The New York City public school system is the biggest apple on the U.S. education tree. By enforcing policies that aggressively dismantle educational inequality — rather than reinforce educational redlining — many more students can thrive in our classrooms, our labor force, and our democracy. There are many other ideas and solutions that the governments came up with it ,but just talking no action and it’s a huge problem to the low-income neighborhood which also can be unsafe neighborhood without a good education and influence, they will turn out to be like Dee Watkins who was once a decent a person who didn’t think of selling drugs, because his brother told him so but the under the influence of the people he met, culture and the bad neighborhood made him to become a hustler. I think my solution should be very easy to convince the school departments, because why shouldn’t they just lower the funds for wealthy schools if they’re going to do it to the low-income neighborhood schools, it wouldn’t really a problem for the wealthy schools because they have the money to donate to their school but the low-income neighborhood schools don’t. Also it’s very realistic plan the board would understand that they wouldn’t want another cycle for the bad neighborhood, they would know I’m trying to find a solution to help fix the culture in the neighborhood in almost every book I read if the book got African American content in it, they would mention about the horrible neighborhood they were in, by giving a way to help fix it this problem is to give them good influence of going to school and teach them what’s right and wrongs. In the book of the Unbroken brain, she mentions what was it like to be there in the ghetto area in New York where she was dealing, she couldn’t imagine living there under the bad influence of your childhood or even worst your whole life. Although this solution is so convincing to do and necessary, there are people who would disagree this proposal. Many would argue that in the ghetto neighborhood wouldn’t want that change in their environment, because they wouldn’t be used to it, there are also people from the wealth neighborhood would also disagree with lowering their budget and they would have to pay more, even though it’s not a trouble for them in finance-wise, and argue that the lower-income neighborhood don’t use the resources wisely. A new Schott Foundation report that the communities where most of the city’s poor, black and Hispanic students live suffer from New York policies and practices that give their schools the fewest resources (not even basic school requirement)  and their students the least experienced teachers. In contrast, the best-funded schools with the highest percentage of experienced teachers are most often located in the most economically advantaged neighborhoods. The report finds that a black or Hispanic student is nearly four times more likely to be enrolled in one of the city’s poorest performing high schools than an Asian or white, non-Hispanic student.That is definitely true that people from the neighborhood would want a change, but it needs to start from somewhere I’m sure that many people like them and the people I met would like to have a change, and not to have the same cycle again in African American culture. The school department of each district needs to get involved in this project right away. Just talking saying they are doing something about it, but they need to mean it and it means nothing if it’s just talking. The low-income neighborhood hasn’t been able to make a proposal this solution because it’s been like this for many years or even generations and they cannot move forward without any support. If the department of education really want a change for the low-income neighborhood don’t want the same cycle for them then they would also have to protest this serious matter and have their voice heard by the board.