User talk:Awhit063

Why do kids in poverty score lower on standardized tests? By: Ashley Ellis

Introduction

Over the years, poverty has been a major social problem for the United States that has affected millions of American citizens. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2006, 36.5 million people lived in poverty and 12.8 million children under the age of 18 lived in poverty as well (Poverty 2006 Highlights). In 2005, 12.6 million U.S. families were not able to obtain enough food to feed their family members due to lack of money (Barton & Coley, 2007). The conditions and issues experienced by those in poverty cause an immense amount of stress and uncertainty, which makes it extremely hard to get through each day. Children in poverty stricken families struggle to receive a proper education and to perform well in school. Educators and the U.S. government are faced with the issue of solving the achievement gap between children who live in poverty and children who live in the middle and upper class. To conquer and fix the achievement gap, educators and government officials must first understand and evaluate why students from low-income families have lower achievement levels than students from middle and high-income families.

Effects of Poverty on Student Performance

Students living in poverty deal with numerous obstacles such as poor quality schools, violence, and limited access to health care and insurance, all of which affect school performance and cause achievement gaps. Low quality home life is one of the biggest obstacles affecting children in poverty as “much of what later shows up as achievement gaps begins before children even enter school” (Achievement Gaps, 2008, p. 5). The report The Family: America’s Smallest School found that “by the time they’re four years old, children in families where at least one parent is a professional hear 35 million more words than children of parents on welfare,” (Achievement Gaps, 2008, p. 5). This finding represents a huge disadvantage for children in welfare families, because their vocabulary will be extremely limited. It also puts them behind for kindergarten and possibly makes it harder to comprehend what they are taught in kindergarten. Another obstacle faced by students in low-income families is a constant need to move to find affordable housing and obtainable jobs. As a result of moving, students have to change schools constantly, which is a problem because “research has shown that changing schools frequently can have a negative impact on student achievement” (Barton & Coley, 2007, p. 14).

In addition to low quality home life and constant moving, children living in poverty are much “more likely than children from middle-class backgrounds to report increased levels of anxiety and depression.” These factors make it almost unbearable for these children to focus in class and on school assignments, thus leading to poor academic achievement (Amatea & West-Olatunji, 2007, para. 3). The increased levels of anxiety and depression experienced by students in poverty can result from the violence they witness in their neighborhoods and especially in the schools they attend, since they are “more likely to report the presence of gangs in the school than [are] those from higher income households” (Barton, 2003, p. 18). Little or no access to health care and insurance is another major problem for children attending high-poverty schools, because they have increased absences from ongoing illnesses that they cannot afford to treat. Therefore, they miss out on the educational content being taught and fall behind (Barton & Coley, 2007). The schools children in poverty attend usually have “inadequate facilities, fewer textbooks and supplies, less administrative support, and larger class sizes,” which makes it hard for teachers to provide a quality education to these children so they can have high academic achievement (Amatea & West-Olatunji, 2007, para. 5).

All of these obstacles lead to “greater incidence of school failure [and] lower standardized test scores” amongst children who live in poverty (Amatea & West-Olatunji, 2007, par. 5).

Opposing Arguments & Research

Even though there is overwhelming evidence that students in poverty perform lower academically, evidence does exist that proves otherwise. A report published by the Center on Education Policy found that “low-income students at public urban high schools generally perform as well on achievement tests as students who attend private high schools” (Urban Students, p. 5). This finding contradicts the argument that students in poverty score lower on standardized tests than students in middle and upper classes. Another report, Are Private High Schools Better Than Public High Schools?, also contradicts this argument by stating private school students “didn’t do any better on math, reading, science and history tests” than those students attending public schools (Urban Students, p. 5). Specific ethnic groups, such as African-American and Filipino-American, often get placed into the category of low-income students because they perform lower academically than students in middle and upper classes, but this is not always the case. For example, the Filipino-American students in the Lodi Unified School District are proving they do not fit into the academic achievement gap by “continu[ing] to outscore every other student population year after year,” which their standardized tests scores prove as they “beat out the Lodi Unified's total average by a whopping 73 points” (Dyer, 2008, p. 1).

Of course there will always be contradicting evidence and research to the argument that students who live in poverty display lower academic achievement, however; educators and government officials still need to find solutions to the achievement gap that research has proven does exist in United States’ schools.

Possible Methods & Solutions

School counselors, teaching students to use technology efficiently, increased parent involvement in school, and providing early childhood education are examples of possible solutions to improving low-income students’ academic performance. Many school counselors “have received training in multicultural counseling” and therefore understand the different factors of poverty that negatively influence low-income children’s academic achievement (Amatea & West-Olatunji, 2007, para. 7). School counselors who have received multicultural training can help school staff better understand the effects of poverty on low-income students, allowing teachers to “design[] more effective learning experiences” for students and more effectively reach their parents(Amatea & West-Olatunji, 2007, para. 7).

Technology has become essential to daily life and to most job professions. The U.S. Department of Education has jumped on board with technology by setting up the National Educational Technology Standards for schools to develop technological performances students should be able to complete by a certain grade (Thomas, 2007). Teachers frequently give students assignments where some form of technology is necessary to complete the task, but often students in high poverty schools are not knowledgeable on how to use computers or other forms of technology, which puts them at a severe disadvantage (Thomas, 2007). However, if high poverty schools effectively teach technology to students, then they will be prepared to “either enter the work force or [] complete higher-level degrees,” and begin to break the cycle of poverty because more and more low-income students will be prepared to obtain better jobs (Thomas, 2007, para. 16).

Increasing the amount of parent involvement in children’s schooling can also help improve student performance, since research has proven “that when parents and schools work together to support student learning, children do better in school” (Barton & Coley, 2007, p. 32). Parents can become more involved by ensuring their students attend school regularly, having conferences with their children’s teachers, and ensure their students complete all assignments and projects (Barton & Coley, 2007).

Programs encouraging early childhood education such as Head Start have been in the headline of newspapers and have been major topics for U.S. legislators. This is partly because of the belief that the “school readiness gap begins before children enter school and places children at risk of failure in school” (An NEA, 2008, p. 1). State officials are being encouraged to adopt these preschool programs, because “research continues to confirm the benefits of quality early childhood programs” will prevent achievement gaps between low-income students and high-income students (An NEA, 2008, p. 1). Research supporting preschool programs has shown “children in quality preschool programs are less likely to repeat grades,” since they are better prepared to start school and are being equipped with the skills necessary to succeed in future levels of schooling (An NEA, 2008, p. 1).

Application Questions

1. According to the U.S. Census Bureau in 2006, how many children lived in poverty? a)5 million b) 12 million c) 12.8 million d) 36.5 million

2. Sarah is a student in a high poverty school who has shown low academic performance. Which obstacle in her life could be causing her low performance? a) too much studying b) low quality home life c) small class size d) strong parental involvement

3. Thomas is a student living in poverty who has reported increased levels of depression and anxiety. What caused his depression and anxiety? a) the presence of gangs in his school b) low quality home life c) moving d) inadequate school facilities

4. A report published by the Center on Education Policy found that _________________at public urban high schools generally perform as well on achievement tests as students who attend private high schools. a) low-income students b) poverty stricken students c)less privileged students d) less-income students

5. Mrs. Whitaker is a school counselor who has helped teachers at her school to understand the different factors of poverty that negatively influence low-income children’s academic achievement. She has most likely received what kind of training? a) urban counseling training b) ethnic counseling training c)cultural counseling training d) multicultural counseling training

Answers: 1. c 2. b 3. a 4. a 5. d

References

Amatea, E.S. & West-Olatunji, C.A. (2007). Joining the conversation about educating our poorest children: Emerging leadership roles for school counselors in high-poverty schools. Professional School Counseling, 11(2). 81-89. Retrieved Jan. 16, 2008 from: http://find.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.odu.edu Barton, P.E. & Coley, R.J. (2007). The Family: America’s Smallest School. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2008, from Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey. Web site: http://www.ets.org.

Barton, P.E. (2003). Parsing the Achievement Gap: Baselines for Tracking Progress. Retrieved Jan. 21, 2008, from Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey. Web site: http://www.ets.org.

Dyer, A. (2008, February 2) Making the grade: Why do Lodi Unified’s Filipino students get top scores in district? Lodi News-Sentinel; Sect News:1. <http://www.lodinews.c-    om. 2008 Feb 2.

Thomas, D. (2007). Teaching technology in low socioeconomic areas: Technology education will help break the cycle of       poverty for low socioeconomic students. The Technology Teacher, 67(3), 4-8. Retrieved January 18, 2008 from: http://find.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.odu.edu

(2008). Achievement Gaps Begin Before School Starts. Virginia Journal of Education, Feb., 5.

(2008). An NEA policy brief: Early Childhood Education and School Readiness. Retrieved Feb. 1, 2008, from National Education Association, Washington D.C.. Web site: http://www.nea.org/earlychildhood/images/policybriefece.pdf.

(2007). Poverty: 2006 Highlights. Retrieved Jan. 31, 2008, from U.S. Census Bureau, Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division. Web site: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty06/pov06hi.html.

(2008). Urban Students Matching Private School Test Scores. Virginia Journal of     Education, Feb., 5.