Student Achievement Gap based on Social Economic Status

2

SOCIOECONOMIC THEORIES 1

Student Achievement Gap based on Social Economic Status

Charles Poole

School of Education, Liberty University

Author Note

Charles Poole

I have no known conflict of interest to disclose.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Charles Poole

Email: [email protected]

Student Achievement Gap based on Social Economic Status

It has been well documented in the research literature common to understand that parents' socioeconomic status is a key determinant of their children's academic achievement at all levels of education (e.g., XXX; YYY). This has been the foundation for many governments and private programs. That level the academic field between the wealthy and the poor within school districts. Unfortunately, nothing much little has changed after decades of trying my strategies. Educators and governments have continued to make the big mistake of ignoring direct factors that affect educational attainment among students (citation). For instance, little is done regarding class sizes, level of teacher experiences, resources available and student willingness to learn. All these are direct factors that, when well addressed, could help alleviate the situation. However, parents' economic status, which is an indirect factor, has received much-unwarranted attention. Concurrent sections of this paper highlight misconceptions regarding parental income (socioeconomic status) as the determinant of academic achievement among school-going children (citation). Comment by Author: Do not use a pronoun to represent the ideas in a clause, sentence, or passage, unless there is no room for ambiguity. Comment by Author: This is a sentence fragment. Rewrite to ensure that the sentence has both a subject and verb and is a complete thought. Comment by Author: What strategies are you referring to? Comment by Author: If this is from research literature (it should be), provide a proper citation.

I: School Reflect IQ

We have come to erroneously believe that academic achievement is a crucial reflection of a child’s IQ (citation). This is because those examinations are done, including the internationally accredited ones such as SATs, tend to illustrate the child's ability to solve presented issues. Higher performance is therefore taken to mean that the respective children have high IQs whereas below average, as well as poor performance, is considered to suggest that the children have lower IQs. It is regrettable that a significant percentage of top examination scorers come from well to do families and therefore said to have better IQs (citation). In contrast, average and below-average scorers come from lower economic cadres. However, taking IQ tests done, the same groups would provide different results as they would be distributed in a very different way as opposed to how students got ranked in classroom examinations results sheets. Comment by Author: Unclear. Rewrite so that your intended meaning is more apparent to the reader.

This belief ignores that IQ is usually fixed and develops at its own pace and that the school has little impact on it. On the contrary, it is the IQ that affects children's schooling capabilities and not vice versa. For instance, a 1932 research on IQ for over 80,000 Scottish children became an eye-opener when it was repeated on 500 of them who were still alive six decades later (Scott, 2011). The results indicated that those on top of the test in 1932 remained on top of their colleagues. At the same time, those at the bottom remained there. The only difference experienced in the repeated study was the decline in scores on some participants, which was explained by old age complications such as dementia. This concludes that whereas IQ may change over time, the gap between people's scores is more likely to remain constant, where those with higher scores retain their lead against the others and vice versa. Comment by Author: What are you referring to? Focus on clarity and brevity in your writing.

There are many ways, other than academics, that IQ levels become visible and used by children (citation). For instance, a significant number of students whose class performance is wanting but excel in other areas such as sports and other extracurricular activities. Many schools do not care to measure how well the students are doing in these equally essential activities are therefore left with only one measure, that of academics (citation). Such students whose efforts in other areas fail to get incorporated into grades may further become demoralized in academics, which also hurt traditional performance measures. However, this occurrence does not change their IQ scores whatsoever despite being regarded as deficient in academics.

II. Parental Income Prepares Children for School

The amount of parental income has been used to explain that the respective children are more ready for schooling for various reasons (citation). For instance, children of the rich are said to have been exposed to education through home activities. The child's thinking capacity is further supposed to be well developed to the point of being able to undertake academic activities with minimal teacher supervision (citation). They are also said to be already prepared in the understanding of schooling and what it involves. On the other hand, the theory has held that children from lower economic cadres are not ready for an education in terms of several factors (citation). For instance, they tend to have poorly developed vocabulary. This means they start schooling at a lower level because while their affluent counterparts kick the academic ball running once they enroll, the poor have to begin learning vocabularies. Unfortunately, not all teachers are patient enough to help those at the bottom of the class and concentrate on the high achievers. This fact leaves poor students far behind and, consequently, poor performance when an assessment is done. This theory's long-term impact is that the pre-school conditions in terms of socioeconomic status become life-determining as lower academic achievement means a lack of access to higher-paying academic courses and subsequent careers (Behizadifar et al., 2016). It is indeed regrettable that this is how society is the world over because employers tend to look for grades that were attained in schooling before offering job opportunities. Indeed, it is common to see in job advertisements that applicant must have reached a particular grade overall or in specific courses (citation). Of course, the higher scorers, most of who come from well to do families, end up getting the said jobs as their colleagues from low-income families wallow. Comment by Author: Support your assertions with research literature. Comment by Author: What theory are you referring to? Comment by Author: Author name does not match with the one in your reference list.

Unfortunately, the theory is erroneous since governments at all levels, including local, state and nationally, have continued to invest billions of dollars to make education more accessible to all and even ensure that quality has been leveled across the board. This has been the trend internationally in foreign countries, education systems and international organizations and non-profits have continued to campaign for more investment in deprived areas to ensure equity in education access. However, the minimal progress that has so far been achieved leads to the conclusion that access to money does not help narrow the gap between the two groups separated by socioeconomic status (citation). Therefore, cash, whether in parents' pockets or government coffers, does not play a significant role in determining the ability to achieve higher academic scores. There exist other higher contributing factors that, if addressed, could level the field between the two groups (citation).

III. Parental Income Means More Parental Support Comment by Author: This section has zero citation. Then, where did this theme come from?

This theory holds that wealthy parents have more time to direct their children's education and school activities and contribute to better performance. On the other hand, states the theory, poor parents spend most of their time looking for work or workings several jobs. Therefore, they do not contribute as they should to their children's academics and school-related activities. Those holding these thoughts have further concluded that the theory explains why better school attendance for wealthy parents' children and poor attendance to the others. However, it is not always true that having money means that parents have enough time for their children's academics. There are instances where these parents become even busier to be available at dinner tables, let alone during homework assignments. Others even only afford to be at home only on weekends, a time so limited to catch up with children's academic progression. Comment by Author: You are keeping referring to a theory, however, it is not clear what theory you are referring to. Provide a proper citation for the theory.

Furthermore, the theory fails to explain why middle-class children do not perform as well as their higher-class counterparts. This is despite the fact that even the middle-class shows a significant commitment to their children's academic undertakings. Further, this group tends to move into the neighborhood with better schools for their children to benefit. Employing the services of tutors for remedial tuition is also commonplace for these middle-class families. This understanding leaves more questions than answers regarding this theory. One of the issues is whether parenting gets better with an increase in income. Had the approach been correct, we would have seen instances where children whose parents successfully move from lower economic status into the middle class and eventually to high net worth improve their academic performance concurrently. Unfortunately, performance remains constant regardless of the change in parents' financial fortunes, which further debunks the theory that parents' income means more involvement in children's schooling and boost performance.

IV. Income Signals Child Health and Resilience Comment by Author: There should be research literature to support this theme. Yet, there is zero citation in this section.

Upper-class money has been said to grant respective children better health and, therefore, help to enhance class concentration, and they hardly miss school because of health issues. Besides, these children have been reported to be resilient in handling challenges that come with schooling since they are academically prepared from the early stages of their lives. According to the theory, children easily overcome stress related to school academics and activities instead of their poorer classmates. It is further argued that children of the rich have various ways to release their stress and come back to school refreshed and ready to face their academic challenges while renewed. On the other hand, children from low-income families lack ample space and avenues to relieve their stress and therefore spill over into academics.

However, one fails to understand the reason why there are so many students from upper-class families that still struggle academically. There are instances where these students are at the bottom of their respective classes throughout their education. This is despite many interventions undertaken by parents to help boost performance. Some are even unable to cope with school challenges to show interest in doing away with education altogether.

Contrary to beliefs peddled through this theory, urban schools that rich kids attend are nothing but extremely dreadful, annoying, and academic morale killer. The decades and even some centuries-old infrastructure that has rarely been modernized make schooling in the areas a tedious exercise. Therefore, it is not that wealthy parents' children have better health or resilience that results in better academic performance, as the theory explains.

V. Poor Children Attend Inferior Schools Comment by Author: See my comment above regarding supporting your arguments with research literature.

This theory holds that most schools attended by poor children are of poor quality compared with those accompanied by their affluent counterparts. There are significant errors in such an explanation. First, it is assumed that a city or school district has a mechanism where all the children from emerging countries attend a specific school and richer ones the other. This is not the case as children in schools are mixed as they come from every socioeconomic group within the respective school's catchment area. Quality of schools in such economically mixed neighborhoods, which is common, therefore should not occur while explaining how why performance differences between the haves and have-nots occur.

Another form of the argument from this theory adherents that schools in poor communities are poorly funded, whereas those from affluent neighborhoods are supported exceptionally well. While it is arguable that such an occurrence takes place in some instances, there has been no research evidence or even statistics to cement this assertion that it takes place overall categorically. Instead, these conclusions are usually politically expressed to justice injustice in society or skewing policies and political decisions. Further, the substantial financial investments and undertaken to improve learning conditions do not seem to have earned desired fruits. The federal government has been at the forefront of providing grants for this undertaking, but nothing much could be said regarding ensuring results. One can argue that there are instances or locations where more money has been spent on the so-called poor schools compared to their more prosperous areas, and the intended results have not been realized.

VI. Good Schools Don’t Add Much Value Comment by Author: See my comment above regarding supporting your arguments with research literature.

The opponents of the theory argue that the so-called good schools attended by the rich's children do not add much value as it is being claimed. Instead, the so-called bad schools in poor neighborhoods add more value to their students attending them. This develops from an understanding that poor students are said to begin schools with little knowledge. Or what is taught therein. Their more affluent counterparts are therefore said to know so much more such that school contribution is marginal. Also, it is argued that more affluent kids are more willing to attend and follow academic procedures in the so-called school because that had long been the precedence in their respective families.

On the other hand, it is said that the constant poverty cycle in poor neighborhoods means that children lack proper academic achievement precedence and therefore lead to a decline in interest to do well in school. Nothing could be further from the truth as the theory ignores the reality on the ground. There are many instances where children from low-income families encourage themselves to break from the said poverty trap. Similarly, there are many children from more affluent families. They do not see the vitality of working hard in education because they already have all the best things in life through respective wealthy parents. Working hard in school is usually a personal choice, especially to those who have attained puberty age and above. There are even instances where even younger children are determined to do their best regardless of present economical status in a respective family.

VII. School is Dysfunctional Comment by Author: See my comment above regarding supporting your arguments with research literature.

This theory holds that school, primarily how it gets conducted, is entirely dysfunctional and has historically resisted change. The theory argues that successful education has only been found in schools that have gone against the traditional approach. Therefore, discontinuation of the current method of instructions does not improve the condition for both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum. In such an understanding, children from poor economic backgrounds suffer more because of the supposed lack of schooling exposure. Their wealthier counterparts suffer less since there exists some continued level of schooling exposure in respective homes.

Current schools and education system shave fared severely because they have concentrated more on academic grade progression, coverage of content, developed many centuries and had not undergone any change since then. There has been little in character and talent development, both vital for child growth and preparation for life after schooling afterward. Therefore, lack of proper direction from schools has resulted in a situation where peer pressure has become so strong and the primary determinant of values held by these children regardless of their socioeconomic status. The problem with this theory is that there is no proper school, even the ones society sees as producing crème de la crème of students. It is not correct to ascertain that such institutions do not add value to children's academic, moral and overall well-being.

Some of the education reform policies such as the recent No Child Left Behind (NCLB), have complicated matters instead of bringing lasting solutions (Thomas & Brian, 2011). This policy had so much emphasis on test scores, which sadly, has become the basis of education. Instead of overall improvement and development of the whole person and preparing them for their tomorrow. Unfortunately, the same would continue because the society has let politicians develop and aggressively push for such policies that destroying the little faith society has on its education sector.

Conclusion

Analysis of the above seven theories concludes that all the information and data that we have been relying on to understand the impact of socioeconomic status on academic well-being have been wrong and have led to inaccurate policies. Unfortunately, these data and information have come to be regarded as truth and irrefutable academically or otherwise. Therefore, it is high time that society starts looking wider into the issue with open-mindedness and only then would proper remedies mechanisms be developed and successfully implemented. Unfortunately, socioeconomic status is often mentioned because of its high impact politically. Politicians want to be seen to be putting the interests of the poor at heart and therefore provide statements regarding how addressing socioeconomic issues would automatically eliminate the gap between the poor and the rich academically.

Similarly, bureaucrats at the local level likewise want to look empathetic and therefore sprinkle some education budget in poor schools without proper consideration on all the crucial areas needed to be fixed for children in these areas have a wholesome education. Extensive research needs to be undertaken to investigate other determinants of academic performance for children from all walks of life without looking into their socioeconomic status. This would indeed help develop solutions to a highly misunderstood topic that has historically been addressed using erroneous information that has exacerbated the problem further.

References Comment by Author: I saw the draft of your research methodology presentation on Blackboard. There were more authors in the reference. If you are going to use those work for your methodology ppt, then why are you not using them here for your literature review manuscript? Comment by Author: I have added in all the references from the power point

Acharya, A. S., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., & Nigam, A. (2013). Sampling: Why and how of it.

Indian Journal of Medical Specialties, 4(2), 330-333.

Behzadifar, M., Behzadifar, M., Abdi, S., Arabsalmani, M., Saroukhani, M., & Sayehmiri, K. (2016). The Role of Socioeconomic Status on Health-Related Quality of Life. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research: JCDR, 10(7), LC10-3.

Bolderston, A. (2008). Writing an effective literature review. Journal of Medical Imaging and

Radiation Sciences, 39(2), 86-92.

Braveman, P., & Gottlieb, L. (2014). The social determinants of health: it's time to consider the

causes of the causes. Public health reports (Washington, D.C.: 1974), 129 Suppl 2(Suppl

2), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549141291S206

Curtis, E. A., Comiskey, C., & Dempsey, O. (2016). Importance and use of correlational

research. Nurse researcher, 23(6).

Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and presenting design science research for

maximum impact. MIS quarterly, 337-355.

Krosnick, J. A. (2018). Questionnaire design. In The Palgrave Handbook of Survey Research

(pp. 439-455). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Lee, V. E., & Burkam, D. T. (2002). Inequality at the starting gate: Social background

differences in achievement as children begin school. Economic Policy Institute, 1660 L Street, NW, Suite 1200, Washington, DC 20036.

Mirowsky, J. (2017). Education, social status, and health. Routledge.

Pavelek, L. (2013). Approaches for selecting the correct research strategy. In Proceedings in Scientific Conference (No. 1).

Scott, B. (2011). Intelligence Is Still Not Fixed at Birth. Available At: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201110/intelligence-is-still-not-fixed-birth

Thomas S. & Brian, J. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind on student achievement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 30 (3), 418-446.

Behzadifar, M., Behzadifar, M., Abdi, S., Arabsalmani, M., Saroukhani, M., & Sayehmiri, K. (2016). The Role of Socioeconomic Status on Health-Related Quality of Life. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research: JCDR, 10(7), LC10-3.

Scott, B. (2011). Intelligence Is Still Not Fixed at Birth. Available At: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201110/intelligence-is-still-not-fixed-birth

Thomas S. & Brian, J. (2011). The impact of No Child Left Behind on student achievement," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 30 (3), 418-446.