The achievement gap between white and non-white students: a conceptual  (Page 9/19)

In every society, poverty affects the lives of families (Freire, 1970). Poverty brings adversity and missed opportunities for families and, most importantly, children. Freire (1970) discussed the afflictions experienced by the peasants of Brazil and the struggles that they faced as a result of their poverty. He conducted a national campaign to help educate the poor, illiterate adults and children of Brazil because he believed that education brings power to those persons who do not have any power.

Allington (2002) identified poverty as a growing problem that was overlooked by the school systems, politicians, and by policy makers. He believed an achievement gap was growing between the poor and the rich and that little had occurred to alleviate this dilemma. Thus, poor children continue to lack proficiency in reading because of the “absence of reading materials, such as books and magazines” (p. 14). Allington (2002) also stated that the “achievement gap continues to grow due to children having little or no exposure to reading materials during the summer” (p. 13).

Viadero and Johnston (2000) suggested that poverty is the primary contributor to the gaps and lags in minority success. Researchers (e.g., Levin, 1995; Sirin, 2005; Viadero&Johnson, 2000) have estimated that Hispanics are twice as likely to be raised in a poor household, compared to Asian-Americans and White families. Growing up in households with medium to high socio-economic status has been related to academic achievement. Chow (2007) compared the Texas Assessment of Knowledge&Skills (TAKS) scores of nearly 10,000 students, from five different school districts and determined that students who were receiving free and reduced lunches scored 50-100 points lower than students who did not receive free and reduced lunches. Other researchers have suggested that reducing differences in socio-economic status and income “…by several thousand dollars would reduce the achievement gaps” among families of minority status (Duncan&Magnuson, 2005, p. 47).

Duncan and Magnuson (2005) maintained that socio-economic hardships for families have inadvertent consequences on children and on their test scores. A family’s home stability and economic circumstances play an important role in academic success (Lee&Bowen, 2006; Tapia, 2004). Tapia (2004) documented that families who were involved in their child’s schooling and classroom activities had higher grade point averages than their classmates. However, parents who did not involve themselves in their children’s school dealt with an “information gap” from schools (Teske, Fitzpatrick,&Kaplan, 2006, p. 969). Thus, parents who were low income (less than $10,000 per year) received less information from school personnel and administrators of school districts than parents who had high incomes (more than $10,000 per year) (Teske et al., 2006).

Eamon (2005) also documented that parents who provided cognitive stimulation within the home, increased students’ academic achievement overall in reading and mathematics. Alfaro, Umaña-Taylor, and Bámaca (2006) described similar findings on students’ academic achievement and their parents’ involvement in their schooling. The researchers discussed academic achievement for girls, if their mothers were involved, and academic success for boys was prevalent if their fathers were involved. Similarly, Portes (1999) determined that 40% of the variance in school achievement among Latino children was explained by socio-psychological factors, which included family support. When analyzing the factors that create academic achievement among students who score low on standardized tests, Ma and Klinger (2000) commented that a statistically significant relationship was present between families’ attitudes and their belief in working with their children’s teachers and school. Strong parental involvement was associated with higher socio-economic status and higher achievement scores.