As populations continue to grow and technological advances are continuously being discovered, there are still regions that are impoverished and have little chance to be successful due to poor school systems and under qualified teachers. The Corridor Region down highway I-95 is not an exception to these qualifications; it is commonly referred to as "The Corridor of Shame" after Bud Ferillo created the documentary. Some actions have been taken to improve these struggles, but it will take decades to turn around these counties' neglect of students. One organization that has attempted to create a better learning environment for the students within these schools is Teach For America. Teach For America can have a more negative affect in these low-income areas of South Carolina and further actions should be taken to give the children of the Corridor Region a better chance to be successful. 

This topic is interesting because having grown up in South Carolina, there are lots of news reports about the poor education across the state but especially in the suburban counties within the Corridor Region. South Carolina is ranked 43rd in the nation in education (Clayton), and this is partially because of the negligence of education in the low-income areas in the state. The conditions of many of the school buildings in these areas are in very poor condition due to the lack of funding the counties can provide. I believe that any student from any walk of life can become successful because I have seen it first hand, but it is impossible to have success when growing up in schools with under qualified teachers and a community that cannot afford changing the school system. Majority of the people who grow up in the Corridor Region stay in the Corridor Region their whole lives. It is such a difficult trap to escape from without help, and everyone deserves a chance to success. 

In regards to seeing these poor schools, I have not actually been to most of the schools in the Corridor of Shame, but I have played basketball in some of the facilities of these schools; the conditions were below average. Many of the restrooms in the gym were unusable and most of the walls had chipped paint as well as cracks in it. The lighting within the gyms was dark and the gyms could be described as dank facilities due to the lack of funding available within these schools. Also, many of schools within the city limits of Columbia are in very poor condition, and the students do not experience the same support as the students who attend schools in higher income regions. I have a desire to change not only many of the low-income schools' facilities but the home life for the children as well. Teach For America not only focuses on educating the children, but many of the parents must be taught too; whether it be in how to support their children or learning to push their children to become better students and to enforce rules within their homes to keep their children out of trouble.

The Corridor Region consists of the schools and homes down highway I-95. This region is one of the poorest in South Carolina with a high unemployment rate and declining population. The article, "Education Funding, Expenditures and Outcomes in South Carolina's I-95 Corridor Region" is full of stats and percentages about the schools in this area. 21% of the SC population inhabits this region and 5% more children live in poverty than the statewide proportion. Because the area has so little money, the schools in the Corridor Region rely to a much larger degree on state funding than the rest of state (Clayton). Ethical sources are presented throughout the article when each of the charts are cited by the governmental department that has done the research on the different regions of South Carolina. There does not appear to be much of a bias in the article, but every piece of writing has bias to it whether that is the intention or not. This article is bias due to the statistics given and the stats that are left out. The information that is presented within the article is meant for readers to understand the poverty level in this area as well as the poor education, and it does not focus on the folks who have had success within the Corridor Region. The facts are stated very clearly, allowing readers to draw their own opinions with the information given for the most part though.

The school systems within the Corridor Region not only put students at a disadvantage educationally, but the students are more likely to end up in prison because the schools are under employed, "[forcing] them to rely disproportionately on extensive use of suspensions, expulsions, and the police" (Rose). The teachers typically are less qualified and tend to be paid lower salaries as well as less equipped to handle a situation in which discipline is necessary and required. This causes disciplinary action at majority of the schools in "educational ghettos" to fall into the hands of local law enforcement rather than just punishment within the school (Rose).  Katherine Rose's article mainly focuses on how the low-income schools are due to the Separate but Equal clause. These people are still experiencing the issues of racial discrimination towards colored people and the schools are a direct correlation of this; two thirds of the students attending the schools in the Corridor Region are of color (Rose). The article is credible due to the amount of research and statistics discussed throughout it. The sources are cited at the end of the article to where the information was discovered to add to the credibility. The article has a liberal bias to it, and it only discusses the part of the school system where students are at a disadvantage. The article fails to mention the upbringing of the students in attendance or actions being taken by the government and other organizations to try and improve the situation that the students are in to try and obtain an education. The article also does not discuss any of the positives within the low-income schools that may be beneficial steps towards helping out the educational ghettos. 

The Teach For America article focuses on the aspects of TFA that are not always thought about or viewed as a problem. Teach For America is an organization that places college graduates into low income schools across America to give back to less fortunate areas. The teachers are not required to have an education degree, but they go through a training process to prepare them. For many school districts, if TFA did not exist, there would not be enough teachers within the school to have it run more smoothly. The turnover rates within Teach For America are very large because most of the teachers in this program are not in it because they wish to pursue a career in teaching low-income students for many years to come. This can have an emotional effect on the students in the schools because they know that the TFA teachers will be gone shortly even if they have made impacts in the school (Omani). 41 percent of the teachers in this program quit within five years, and 12 percent after their first year teaching. Teachers become much more affective after their third, fourth, or fifth year teaching so when they leave the schools before this time period, the educators will not reach their full capabilities in teaching (Omani). This source is credible due to the statics pulled and cited throughout the article. It is clearly written to display the flaws in Teach For America with the intention of either improving the program or showing that there could be a different way than just TFA that can change these low-income regions' school systems. The article states facts about how TFA is not necessarily making improvements in the regions they place teachers in, but it does not directly say that. The article forces readers to one way of thinking, and it's that TFA needs much improvement and reform. 

I think my research question can be narrowed or hanged within the same subject of Teach For America and low-income education. Right now, my question is argumentative, but I believe it needs improvement. Throughout my research thus far, many of the sources have agreed with my claim that Teach For America has not been largely beneficial in the education ghettos, but many sources support Teach For America as well because no other organization is really working towards helping this unsupported cause. I also have been doing research on the predicament the students are in just by being in the school system before Teach For America even sends teachers into the schools. Each source I have read brings up good points and as I read the different articles, I am swayed both directions. The Corridor Region clearly needs much help, but it is very hard to get people to want to come in and teach in these schools unless it is through Teach For America. I may revise my research question to discuss how Teach For America has been of benefit within the Corridor of Shame rather than how it has no benefitted the schools.

