Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
But there is a high correlation between overall student performance and economic status of their family. It's not the educational level of their family. If that were true, children of uneducated parents would never make it to college. But the issue is complex. Schools in poor neighborhoods tend to have higher drop-out rates, but they also get the short end of the resources, the least experienced teachers and the students come disproportionately from dysfunctional families (that isn't correlated with parental educational levels, but it is with poverty). Families where both parents work or one parent is missing and there isn't anyone to supervise the kids after school have a higher rate of problems, and those families are concentrated in the poor neighborhoods. And it seems to me that districts with a high proportion of students from low-income families tend to be under the control of much more authoritarian administrations where policies are administered "by the book" rather than with some degree of intelligence. Smart kids, even if they are poor can see this and it tends to drive them away.
1) If poverty is a stronger factor affecting student achievement than the
teacher effect, wouldn't that mean that poor children cannot be taught well?
I've met tens of thousands of exceptions to this rule. I work with the AVID
program and for 20+ years, we've been falsifying the hypothesis that poor
children whose parents didn't go to college cannot be successful. If a
teacher is capable of educating a single poor student to high levels, then
by definition, this hypothesis is incorrect. I'll be sitting with 5,000
exceptions at AVID senior recognition in a couple of weeks. These kids
complete more AP courses than their affluent peers and complete college-prep
courses at almost 100%. I'll let them know that they should go home because
they are not capable of learning. I always love it when research says that
something is impossible when people are out there doing it.
2) Maybe I misunderstand what you mean by "teacher effect" but shouldn't
teacher effect INCLUDE whether or not they are actively engaging their
students? Seems like pedagogy would be a strong piece of "teacher effect."
I, personally, would rephrase this argument as, "An exceptional teacher has
the ability to overcome the effects of poverty on learning. Interactive
engagement has been shown to be an effective part of an exceptional science
teacher's repertoire."