Adolescence: Change and Continuity

Questions from Teachers . . . Answers from Students

We share your concern regarding the effects of poverty on school achievement. Unfortunately, there are many students who are disadvantaged because of their SES. According to the United States Census Bureau Website, in 1998, approximately 34.5 million people were living in poverty. The Hispanic population had the second highest percent of families living below poverty standards (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). There are many identifiable reasons as to why some students have a hard time learning in a school environment. Before interventions can be created, factors explaining the effects of poverty must be clearly researched.

There is little doubt that children raised in poverty have less enjoyable childhoods. But to what extent does poverty affect developmental outcomes and thereby reduce opportunities for success and happiness in adulthood? A study by Duncan, Brooks-Gunn, and Klebanov (1994) indicated that among the SES measures available in their data, family income is a powerful correlate of age 5 IQ than more conventional SES measures such as maternal education, ethnicity, and female headship. Duncan et al., (1994) IQ regressions that included poverty patterns showed that the effects of persistent poverty were roughly twice as large as the effects of transient poverty. As literature on school dropouts and achievement indicates, these findings suggest that the apparent effects of female headship on child cognition are due mostly to the lower family incomes of female-headed families (Garfinkel & McLanahan, 1986). Although decidedly less powerful than family-income differences, neighborhood income differences were significant determinants of age 5 IQ. Residing in neighborhoods with more affluent neighbors raised IQ 1.6 points for each 10% increase in the proportion of affluent neighbors (Duncan et al., 1994).

In contrast, they found no negative effect of the proportion of poor neighbors on age 5 IQs (Duncan et al., 1994). The fact that affluent but not poor neighbors had an influence on child IQ in Duncan et al., (1994) data suggests that neighborhood-resource and parental-role-model mechanisms rater than contagion may be at work. Duncan et al., (1994) states that family and neighborhood income differentials go a long way in accounting for the differences in IQ scores of black and white children.

In Duncan et al., (1994) Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) sample, the IQ difference at age 5 is 10.7 points, controlling for site, treatment-group status, gender of child, and birth weight. The addition of maternal education and father presence, two of the sociodemographic variables often measured in developmental studies, reduces the ethnic difference to 7.8 IQ points or about a half standard deviation (Duncan et al., 1994). These results suggest that not including family economic measures will overestimate ethnic differences in cognitive and probably school achievement outcomes. Duncan et al., (1994) suggests that average family income had a much larger effect than family size on age 5 IQ. In sum, Duncan et al., (1994) data is consistent with the hypothesis that family income and poverty status are powerful determinants of the cognitive development even after one accounts for other differences in particular family structure and maternal schooling between low- and high-income families. Duncan et al., (1994) states that the learning environment of the home mediates the relation between income and IQ. Thus, economic disadvantage not only has a tangible effect on children through the provision of educational resources available to them, but through the detrimental psychological effect it exerts on their parents (Duncan et al., (1994).

Additionally, peers can have an influential effect on other peers when they are in a situation such as poverty. One of the main things that can be used to improve the poverty situation is peer tutoring. This can be used in many different ways to help children learn various things. It has been proven to be very successful with children who are trying to learn a new language, or master a language. In one study conducted, titled Books and Buddies, it was used to help learn English as a second language. It was thought that if a student was paired with a child who spoke English fluently they would have an easier time learning the language. This could be used with any subject, not just language.

It is thought that peer tutoring provides opportunities for peer interaction outside as well inside class. It could strike up a friendship that may help one child or the other. They may be able to share things with each other and confide in each other. It may also help in improving their self- esteem. When children learn, they begin to feel better about themselves.

If there are a few select children in classroom that have grasped a particular concept and would be willing to peer tutor other children in the class, it may be a tremendous help. The setting that a child is living in can have detrimental effects on their well being. If there is a person in their school setting that they feel comfortable talking with and confiding in, it may make a world of difference.

While it has been noted that poverty can have detrimental effects on academic performance, children do have certain resources that they can rely on to help protect them from the risks associated with growing up in poverty. Parents can be supportive in an environment of poverty, and they can help their children to be successful in school. "Give me an involved parent and I will give you a successful child" (Smock and McCormick, 1995, p. 399). This is a statement found in popular writings.

It has been noted that, "…the myriad of current empirical studies, critiques, and commentaries focusing on US education often cite the importance of parental involvement in the educational process" (Smock and McCormick, 1995, p. 395). Parental involvement is important for improving their child's school success. The importance of parental involvement is evident in efforts to improve aspects of the school itself, such as damage to the building, and in efforts to improve problematic academic areas, such as poor mathematic skills of the students in the school.

There are a variety of ways that parents can help the academic achievement of their children. There are obvious ways, such as helping their children with homework. However, parents can also engage their children in educational games, which may reinforce the importance and the value of academic success. Parents can speak with administrators and teachers at the school. Furthermore, there are other ways that parents and caregivers can have direct school contact. For example, they can assist in school fundraising, field trips and other events. They can support the extracurricular activities of their children by attending athletic games, choir or band performances and school assemblies. The Parent Teacher Association (PTA) at the school is another effective way to be involved with a child's education (Smock and McCormick, 1995). A study on the effects that parents may have on their child's academic achievement notes that, "Numerous studies have found that parental attributions regarding their child's school achievement are significantly associated to the children's own attributions…There is some evidence suggesting that parents communicate their explanations about their children's successes and failures through everyday language and behavior" (Georgiou, 1999, p. 400).

Another aspect of cognitive development that is altered or influenced by poverty is motivation. The motivation of an adolescent is without doubt an important factor of school achievement. Henderson and Dweck state that "motivation is more than simply the desire to do well…" it "consists of a variety of psychological processes that determine whether a student will pursue achievement goals, which achieved goals will be pursued, and how effectively they will be pursued" (1990, p.309). The motivation process model that we recently studied explains different theories of ones motivation. Basically, those who believe that intelligence is incremental are more likely to pursue their learning and higher achievement. The theorist on the other end of the spectrum believes that intelligence is fixed. They would be more likely not to seek challenge and chose easy tasks since failure would be attributed to their natural ability (1990).

The locus of control and motivation is another important area on which to focus. This construct is "related to how individuals perceive the relationship between their action and its consequences. Individuals who believe that consequences are a direct result of their actions are said to have internal locus of control or internality." The others who basically see no relationship have an external locus (Banks, 1998, p.87). Research states that internality is "positively related to academic achievement" and that "higher-socioeconomic-status students tend to be more eternal in their orientations than are lower-socioeconomic-status students" (1998, p.87). Research also concludes that ethnic minorities tend to be more external (1998).

References:

Banks, J. A. (1998). Ethnicity, class, cognitive, and motivational styles. In R. E. Muuss & H. D. Porton (Eds.), Adolescent Behavior and Society (pp. 81-90). Boston: McGraw-Hill College.

Duncan, G. J., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Klebanov, P. K. (1994). Economic deprivation and early childhood development. Child Development, 65 (2), 296-318.

Garfinkel, I., & McLanahan, S. (1986). Single mothers and their children: A new American dilemma. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.

Georgiou, S. N. (1999). Achievement attributions of sixth grade children and their parents. Educational Psychology, 19 (4), 399-412.

Henderson, V. L., & Dweck, C. S. (1990). Motivation and achievement. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliot (Eds.), At the Threshold (pp. 308-329). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Kreuger, E. (1999). Books and buddies: Peers tutoring peers. Reading Teacher, 52 (4), 410-414.

United States Census Bureau. (2000). www.census.gov. Accessed: 3/20/2000.

Smock, S. M. (1995). Assessing parents' involvement in their children's schooling. Journal of Urban Affairs, 17 (4), 395-411.

Last updated 4/16/01.