Poverty and Effective Teaching : Early Intervention

This is the first of several articles on poverty and effective teaching. 

Teachers and schools provide an oasis of stability for children who live in poverty. Schools provide two, and in some places, all hot meals that these children get. Teachers may be the only adults these children have contact with that encourage them to read, learn and think. Yet often it is these impoverished children that wind up in an administrator’s office for some infraction or another (Jensen, 2009, p. 19).  Why? What can schools and teachers do to make learning something that these children strive for and expect from themselves? How can educators avoid losing these children to the streets where they are growing up?

As a researcher, I delved into the literature and found that there are three areas where we need to focus: early intervention, culture & climate, and teacher development. 

                                                             Early Intervention

The literature focused on children who are economically disadvantaged, the selected studies suggest intervention at an early age. Andrews and Slate (2002) conducted a quantitative study on the effect of private and public kindergartens to see if there was a difference in the level of readiness between these two types of programs.  They found that there were no statistically significant differences between the private and public prekindergarten type, but they did see a significant difference based on ethnicity.  The authors could not ascertain whether that was because of race or socioeconomic status. Two years later, Magnuson, Meyers, Ruhm and Waldfogel (2004) conducted a quantitative study on the inequity of preschool and school readiness using data from the 1998-1999 Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Looking for answers to the questions:

First, do children who experience center-based care (including prekindergarten programs and preschool) have higher levels of reading and math skills during kindergarten and first grade, and are they less likely to be retained in kindergarten? Second, are the effects particularly large for children from disadvantaged groups? Finally, are some types of center-based child care more beneficial than others? (Magnuson, et al., 2004, p.124).   

Their findings suggested that children who attended Head Start programs had reduced rates of grade retention, and that children from disadvantaged families showed greater benefit from attending prekindergarten programs than students who were not socioeconomically disadvantaged. Their studies show a direct correlation between early intervention and student academic achievement. From the literature it is clear that early intervention programming is essential for families that live in poverty.

Further evidence of this was gathered in Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina.  Prince, Pepper and Brocato (2006) put together relevant statistical data on the effect of poverty on children.  They found that there were ten significant factors that affected the well-being of children including: low birth weight, infant mortality rates, child death rates, teen death and birth rates, high school dropouts, teen employment, parent employment, and single parent households.  Poverty is defined as “a family with income below the federally defined poverty line” (Prince, et al., 2006, p. 23).  With this in mind, then it is important that intervention for these children begin before birth. These authors suggest investing in training for prospective parents. This is reiterated in Jensen (2009) when he suggests the formation of community partnerships that develop knowledge in “nutrition, parenting and study skill coaching for children” (p. 73).  Connecting parents to schools as soon as possible, helps to develop a culture where the school becomes a community resource. 

Building those connections is an important focus for Superintendents, School Boards, Principals, and Teachers.  Every person in the school should be doing what they can to build on and create a community that is supportive of learners, one that focuses on the whole child.  

In the next installment, I will share the literature on Culture and Climate and pull together some suggestions for ways this aspect of schooling can help children in poverty. 

                                              References

Andrews, S. P., & Slate, J. R. (2002). Public and private prekindergarten programs: A comparison of student readiness. Educational Research Quarterly, 25(3), 59.

Jensen, E. (2009). Teaching with poverty in mind. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Magnuson, K. A., Meyers, M. K., Ruhm, C. J., & Waldfogel, J. (2004). Inequality in preschool education and school readiness. American Educational Research Journal, 41(1), 115-157.

Prince, D., Pepper, K., & Brocato, K. (2006). The importance of making the well-being of children in poverty a priority. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(1), 21-28. doi:10.1007/s10643-006-0118-7