poverty and education

In case you're just tuning in, it's no secret that I think that education can only do so much. It is a myth that we are the farthest country behind in education in the world. It is a reality that we have a lot more people living in poverty than other countries, that we do a poor job supporting said population, and that it translates to their educational success (or lack thereof).

This article makes three points:

1.  Governments have the power to reduce poverty, and reduce it a lot.  European governments do far more towards this goal than does the US government.

2.  It’s unlikely that Americans poor people are twice as lazy or unskilled or dissolute as their European counterparts.  Individual factors may explain differences between individuals, but these explanations have little relevance for the problem of overall poverty.  The focus on individual qualities also has little use as a basis for policy.  European countries have fewer people living in poverty, but not because those countries exhort the poor to lead more virtuous lives and punish them for their improvident ways.  European countries have lower poverty rates because the governments provide money and services to those who need them.

3.  The amount of welfare governments provide does not appear to have a dampening effect on the overall economy.

this is what I keep saying

Another example of the importance of poverty, graphically displayed:

from my awesome teacher friend, mr. s

Five really important things to think about when thinking about education in the US.

1. Education reformers are attempting to privatize education to open a new market.

2. There is no education crisis sweeping the nation. Factor out poverty and US students are near the top of international standings. We need to address poverty issues that hold children back.

3. "Full-Service Community Schools" are a model for addressing poverty issues that affect education. "Community Schools NOT Charter Schools"

4. The charter school experiment is a failure. 20 years of data show that only 17% of charter schools perform better than the neighborhood school and nearly 40% perform worse. Giving 4 in 10 students a worse education is not going to close any gaps if you only give 2 in 10 a better education.

5. 50% of teachers quit before 5 years. This means most of the bad ones leave on their own before tenure. No other sector is as self-selecting as this.

US achievement in the context of poverty

In America, we don't have an education crisis; rather we have a poverty crisis. The latest Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) scores indicate that American schools that serve few low-income students rank higher than the world's top-scoring advanced industrial countries. But when they are averaged with the scores of schools with high poverty rates, the United States sinks to the middle of the pack.

-- Michael Rebel

framing education in the context of poverty

Abstract:

This analysis is about the role of poverty in school reform. Data from a number of sources are used to make five points. First, that poverty in the US is greater and of longer duration than in other rich nations. Second, that poverty, particularly among urban minorities, is associated with academic performance that is well below international means on a number of different international assessments. Scores of poor students are also considerably below the scores achieved by white middle class American students. Third, that poverty restricts the expression of genetic talent at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale. Among the lowest social classes environmental factors, particularly family and neighborhood influences, not genetics, is strongly associated with academic performance. Among middle class students it is genetic factors, not family and neighborhood factors, that most influences academic performance. Fourth, compared to middle-class children, severe medical problems affect impoverished youth. This limits their school achievement as well as their life chances. Data on the negative effect of impoverished neighborhoods on the youth who reside there is also presented. Fifth, and of greatest interest, is that small reductions in family poverty lead to increases in positive school behavior and better academic performance. It is argued that poverty places severe limits on what can be accomplished through school reform efforts, particularly those associated with the federal No Child Left Behind law. The data presented in this study suggest that the most powerful policy for improving our nations school achievement is a reduction in family and youth poverty.  [Bold is mine]

 Excerpt:

The negative income tax was studied 20 years ago and it revealed that increases in family income resulted in increased school attendance and better school achievement for the families that gained in income (Salkind & Haskins, 1982). The work assistance programs of the 90s have also been examined and again there is some evidence that as family income went up the achievement and behavior of children in those families improved (Huston, Duncan, Granger, Bos, McLoyd, Mistry, Crosby, Gibson, Magnuson, Romich, & Ventura, 2001). The evidence of the positive influence on student achievement when families are able to leave poverty is consistent and replicable, suggesting that inside-of-school reform needs to begin with outside-of school reform.

-- Our Impoverished View of Education Reform by David C. Berliner