Â鶹ÒùÔº

Three myths about rural education that are holding students back

Much has been written about the potential consequences of getting rid of the Department of Education, one of .

Little of the discussion that we've seen has focused on the impact on rural schools, which than urban ones on federal funding.

In fact, rural education often to policymakers and scholars, who aimed at urban and suburban areas, even though students are educated in rural schools.

This lack of rural research and focus has about rural education that overlook the strengths and opportunities for students who attend rural schools.

As , we compiled a list of three facts about rural education accompanied by the myths that would help policymakers better design programs to support rural students.

1. Rural communities are becoming more diverse

There's a myth that . While it's true that most rural counties are majority white, .

The share of people of color in rural communities , according to U.S. Census data. In addition, people of color .

This is because while white people are leaving, people of color are moving in. From 2010 to 2020, over 2 million white people left rural communities, while . The number of rural people who identified as multiracial doubled to nearly 4 million over the same period, and all rural communities except those in .

While the Black population in rural America shrank somewhat during the 2010s, it remains the case that the . In fact, 81% of Black people who don't live in cities live in the South, a legacy of slavery and how generations of Africans were forcefully taken to work the land as free labor.

Without truly understanding who resides in these communities, educators and policymakers cannot adequately address students' needs. Failure to do so , particularly those who reside in the South.

2. Rural educators know how to succeed

Another myth is that rural communities or resources to .

As such, policymakers to include rural communities' cultural capital when they develop textbooks, teacher training plans and education policies. By , we mean the knowledge, skills, education and advantages that people inherit and use to achieve success in society.

One glaring example is that rural communities in teaching materials and curricula, which frequently ignore their local knowledge, traditions and values. This creates a gap in students' ability to see themselves in jobs and positions outside of their personal contexts. And it hampers teachers' ability to leverage student strengths when teachers are unprepared to connect with their backgrounds.

is another example of rural students' cultural capital being overlooked. Too often, funding policies penalize rural schools for their smaller sizes by supporting the closure and consolidation of schools and overlooking their need for more money to account for lower revenue from local and property taxes. This results in a disruption of rural communities' strong social cohesion and abandoned buildings that reduce economic opportunities.

Community initiatives and local programs provide important resources that larger urban districts might take for granted.

A new grant initiative at Michigan State University that all three of us are involved with aims to help change this. Focused on helping teachers better engage high school physics and chemistry students, the in the rural South to provide rural students with access to more advanced science courses. By working with Alabama A&M University and Winston-Salem State University, it helps ensure local communities' cultural capital are part of the program. It also seeks to pull together community partnerships to advance science access and learning in the South.

By redesigning policies to take advantage of rural cultural capital, communities and policymakers could unlock untapped potential within rural schools and enhance educational outcomes for all students regardless of where they live. We believe such policies could foster stronger connections between rural K-12 public schools and their surrounding communities, creating more relevant and engaging learning experiences for students.

3. Rural students are high achievers

A third myth is that . As a result, their academic success is too often overlooked by researchers and educators.

In reality, students in rural areas meet the same measures of success as in urban ones—especially in the early years. For example, in rural than nonrural schools before the third grade, according to the Center for School and Student Progress. After that, the higher scores begin to fade due to summer learning loss. After schools close over the summer, rural students are generally left with , compared with those in more urban areas. There is a strong need for more state and federal money to increase access to summer learning opportunities.

Despite this widespread learning loss, graduation rates among rural students than those of nonrural students.

But once again, policymakers fail these students, who have than in urban areas.

factors contributing to this trend include limited , the distance between students' hometowns and colleges and universities, and lower awareness of financial aid opportunities. In addition, students in the rural South to advanced science courses like physics and chemistry, which can block postsecondary opportunities.

We believe debunking these and other myths and recognizing the diverse strengths of rural communities would help ensure that all students across the nation, including those in rural areas, can attain long-term educational and economic success.