by Drew Price

Created on: April 02, 2009

There is no doubt that poverty runs rampant in many public schools. Teachers struggle to find successful methods to help teach students who come from poverty. Education is rumored to be the great equalizer where people from any social class are given the opportunity to excel and rise in fortune. However, some would argue that those who do live in poverty lack the resources and support at home to take full advantage of their education without assistance. Some researchers and theorists believe teachers can analyze the behavioral patterns of the poor to learn how to address their educational needs. Contrarily, others would claim that children of poverty are capable of performing at high levels, and believe making assumptions about a whole group is simply stereotyping which causes teachers to lower expectations and, in turn, actually lower student achievement.

Both arguments seem to have the same goal in mind: helping students of poverty learn to their full potential; however, their approaches are quite different. One approach involves the teacher focusing on the behavioral patterns of the poor as a foundation in which to help them, while the other approach places an emphasis on the strengths of students and maintaining high expectations. By examining the effects of poverty on learning and both approaches, perhaps teachers can take positive insights from both perspectives and develop teaching strategies that work in their classrooms.

The Effects of Poverty on Achievement.

The increasing focus on test scores and accountability movement may be holding teachers to unrealistic standards. Despite how politicians and elected school officials demand that no student gets left behind, and poverty is no excuse for poor achievement, Gerald Bracey (1997), a research psychologist claims that "children in poverty do not achieve well in school" (p.163). Bracey goes on to cite a study in 1993 involving students that attended high poverty schools and low-poverty schools. It seems that students who made A's in low poverty schools scored in the 36th percentile in reading and 35th in math, while their more affluent peers scored 81st in reading and 87th in math. Similarly, Richard Rothstein (2008) claims "If you send two groups of students to equally high-quality schools, the group with greater socioecomic disadvantage will necessarily have lower average achievement than the more fortunate group" (p.8). Jonathan Kozol (2005) also repeatedly refers to the achievement gap that exists

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next Page >>