I work, and have studied, in this field and there are reams of academic research on the issue of social mobility and education. The information is there, but people don't like the information because it suggests that there is no quick fix.

Improving education for lower SES children is not as simple as improving schools or getting kids to go to schools. To improve educational outcomes, you have to change poverty and the lives of poor parents. This article, and many many like it, suggest that children are far more affected by their home lives than their schools.

School problems are most evident in high school, but school solutions are most effective from birth to preschool/early primary. Targeting the problem areas (non-completion) will not lead to fewer future non-completion issues. Targeting poverty itself is more effective.

Finally, people of low SES acquire a heavier debt load, and have more difficulty paying it off.

But it can be relatively casually combated through social media in much the same way people attempt to combat sexism, racism, and other discrimination on social media.

Social media campaigns work when they target a simple behaviour and are delivered from peer to peer within a social group. Stopping homophobic speech, the simple behaviour of saying crappy things about gay people, is an easy change. Spending 13 years struggling to succeed in school does not compare.

Stay in school media campaigns assume everything is equal. It is not. end volunteers to do childcare and work odd jobs so that lower SES students are not balancing school success and survival.

Finally, there is no reason someone must chose their one cause. A person can be an environmentalist and an anti-racism advocate. Holding one view does not weaken the other. Race is a clear factor in dropout rates, and therefor one would have to assume that any school advocate would also have to be an anti-racism advocate.