Before children learn to read or write, many educational boundaries are already in place. They are shaped by lines on a map, by the state they reside in and the community they call home.
Recent federal data and nonprofit research show clear patterns. In American public schools, a student’s address, arguably the single largest factor beyond their control, can have an outsized impact on their educational journey. Some students walk into bright classrooms with modern labs, experienced teachers and steady support. Others enter buildings where resources are scarce and staff turnover is constant. These funding disparities and structural differences are present before the first lesson ever begins.
“Living in Quitman, it’s not much here,” says Amriyah Prescott, a rural high school student in Mississippi. “There’s not a lot in our control, so I just focus on what I can.” So, Prescott plans to study nursing at Jones County Community College, near her hometown.
The National Center for Education reported that, on average, over 40% of public school funding comes from local property taxes. Each state distributes funds using its own formula, with the intent of making funding equal and prioritizing students based on specific needs, such as disabilities or limited English proficiency. Mississippi’s newly implemented 2024 Mississippi Student Funding Formula (MSFF), for example, adjusts resources to account for these factors.
Despite these formulas aiming to distribute funds as equitably as possible, the use of property taxes to fund public education has been debated for decades. Critics say property taxes create massive gaps in education.
A report by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy documented this disparity, saying that “to use the local property tax as even a portion of school funding is unjust because it will always benefit the children of the most privileged people.”
Because property values vary widely by community, schools in wealthy areas can raise far more money than schools in poorer areas, even when residents pay similar tax rates. This has led to students having access to educational resources often depending more on where they live rather than on their direct needs.
For rural communities and populations, who are already strained from low in-state sources, these stakes are much higher.
The National Center for Education Statistics classifies schools and districts as rural by having a significant distance from urban populations. Rural schools often face distinct challenges tied to their location and scale, including limited funding and resources, difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, restricted access to advanced coursework and long transportation distances for students. Because rural districts typically serve fewer students over larger areas, they have higher per‑student transportation costs and less room for funds to go toward academic offerings and extracurricular programs.
In Mississippi, more than half of public school students (57.5%) attend rural schools, the second highest in the country. In the National Rural Education Association’s 2025 “Why Rural Matters” report, Mississippi ranked third among the nation’s “highest priority” states, only the second time in 20 years it did not hold the top spot.
From 2003 through 2023, Mississippi was ranked the nation’s highest priority for rural education every year except 2009. It is the only state to hold the No. 1 ranking more than once.
Nearly 250,000 students in Mississippi attend rural school districts, making up about 40% of the state’s student population and 60% of its schools. About 1 in 4 rural students live in poverty, the second highest rate in the nation.
With funding also very limited, Mississippi spends the second least per pupil on instruction, about $2,200 below the U.S. rural average. Adjusted teacher salaries are also about $13,000 lower than the national rural average. Earlier this year, the state reported more than 5,000 vacant teacher positions. Despite efforts to address the shortage, the number of vacancies increased in 2025 compared with the previous school year.
These intricacies can strengthen the barriers of higher education for rural students as they matriculate. According to the U.S. Department of Education, “Rural communities are often located in education deserts, which may limit students’ exposure or convenient access to postsecondary institutions.”
Only about 29% of rural young adults ages 18 to 24 were enrolled in college, compared with nearly 48% of their urban peers. Urban students were also “74% more likely to enroll in college than rural students and 106% more likely than rural students to attain a bachelor’s degree.”
Rural students also face limited access to high-speed internet, transportation, child care and health care. This compounds the challenges of poverty, food insecurity and unstable housing. Many rural students who pursue college are the first in their families to do so and often lack strong preparation in high school. They may also be unfamiliar with how colleges operate, including the application process and financing options.
The Trump administration has been dismantling the Department of Education, and with resources already low, rural students and communities will disproportionately feel this impact the most.
However, Jainae Robinson, a rural high school student in Quitman, Mississippi, says she would like to focus on her future.
Like Amriyah Prescott, she has committed to Jones County Community College with plans of studying nursing.
“That’s why I am ready to graduate,” Robinson says. “When the odds are against you, it is no use in focusing on them even more. I just try my best when I come to school. When I go to college, I will too. ”
Belaynesh Shiferaw is a reporter for HUNewsService.com.
