10 Questions and the Answers… What’s True about Poverty? 

(T/F) 1. The poor neighborhood that kids are from and the classroom teachers are two of the biggest influencers on both the student’s lifelong success.

True. Keep in mind, many other factors also matter.

The neighborhoods matter because they carry over a dozen contributing factors (noise, safety, pollution, law enforcement, landlord pricing, property taxes, open spaces, community, etc.)  Chetty, R, Hendren, N, Kline, P & Saez, E. (2014).  Where is the Land of Opportunity? The Geography of Intergenerational Mobility in the U.S. Quarterly Journal of Economics 129 (4): 1553-1623. And, teachers matter a great deal: Gordon, R. Kane, T & Staiger, D. (2006) Identifying Effective Teachers Using Performance on the Job. Brookings Institute, 01, 8. And, Wenglinsky, H.(2002) How Schools Matter: The Link Between Teacher Classroom Practices and Student Academic Performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 2002. 10, 1-30

(T/F) 2. Children from low-income families start school with smaller and less complex vocabularies than their middle or upper-class peers. There’s a 30 million-word gap.

False. However, this one is complicated. First, the ideal time for fostering a rich, one on one vocabulary is the early years. That evidence is robust. (Golinkoff RM, Hoff E, Rowe ML, Tamis-LeMonda CS, Hirsh-Pasek K. 2019). However, serious research cannot justify broad assumptions based on one small original study (42 children) done on one ethnicity (African-Americans) in one geographic area. Multiple studies have failed to replicate the “language gap” of supposedly 20-30 million words.

See: Sperry DE, Sperry LL, Miller PJ. (2019). Reexamining the Verbal Environments of Children from Different Socioeconomic Backgrounds. Child Dev. 90, 1303-1318.  Purpura DJ. (2019). Language Clearly Matters; Methods Matter Too. Child Dev. 90, 1839-1846.  Sperry DE, Sperry LL, Miller PJ. (2019). Language Does Matter: But There is More to Language Than Vocabulary and Directed Speech. Child Dev. 90, 993-997.

Alternatively, some researchers are concerned that sharing that the word gap is smaller will diminish policy change.  See: Jennifer Keys Adair, Kiyomi Sánchez-Suzuki Colegrove, and Molly E. McManus (2017) How the Word Gap Argument Negatively Impacts Young Children of Latinx Immigrants’ Conceptualizations of Learning. Harvard Educational Review: 87, 309-334. You can understand there will be biases from both sides.

(T/F) 3. Students from poverty typically have brains like others. They just fall behind because of lack of motivation, parental support or resources. Once a student from poverty enters school one to three years behind, there is little hope.

FALSE. There are two parts to this statement. First, regarding brain development, evidence from large samples of children from low-income households show non-typical (atypical) brain development. (Noble KG, Engelhardt LE, Brito NH, Mack LJ, Nail EJ, et al. 2015. Socioeconomic disparities in neurocognitive development in the first two years of life. Dev. Psychobiol 57,535–51). This maturational “poverty” lag occurs in multiple, crucial brain areas, including total gray matter, temporal and frontal lobe, plus the hippocampus. (Hair, N. L., Hanson, J. L., Wolfe, B. L., & Pollak, S. D. 2015). Is the atypical brain development causal in lower children’s outcomes? No, it’s only a correlation. The maturation of the brain regions responsible for higher cognitive functioning is continuous through childhood and adolescence, meaning the opportunity for change parallels the school years (Sowell ER, et al. 2003. Mapping cortical change across the human life span. Nature Neuroscience. 6, 309–315).

The second part of this statement clearly suggests teachers make very little difference. Additionally, it suggests the early brain is fixed, as is. Both of those statements are false. When students from poverty are given above-average teachers, (their students gain an average of 1.5 years of gains or more every year), evidence shows they can gain two full standard deviation in scores from their starting point in first grade to graduation. The brain has robust capacity for change. See:  Ferguson, R (1998) “Can Schools Narrow the Test Score Gap?” In, “The Black-White Test Score Gap” (Jencks & Phillips, Eds.), pgs. 318-374.

Texas school project (multiple cohorts at grades 3-7, coming from repeated observations on more than one-half million students in over three thousand schools in Texas) showed large differences in each teacher’s results. With higher-quality teachers, students from poverty outperformed their peers. See: Steven G. Rivkin, Eric A. Hanushek, and John F. Kain (2005) Teachers, Schools, And Academic Achievement. Econometrica, Vol. 73, No. 2 (March, 2005), 417–458. Based on data from UTD Texas Schools Project.

Also see: A study shows how much teachers matter. Replacing the lowest-performing 5-8% of teachers in the USA with an average teacher would put our country’s school scores among the top 3 countries in the world (vs. #17 currently). Hanushek, EA (2011). The economic value of higher teacher quality. Economics of Education Review 30, 466-479. Plus, Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2011). The long-term impacts of teachers: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood (NBER Working Paper 17699). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. The data are unequivocal; teachers matter.

(T/F) 4.  Even if you’re poor in the U.S., you’re still doing pretty well with cell phones, name brand shoes and big screen TVs.

FALSE. Sometimes the visible stuff such as “bling” or customized rims on a car seem “showy.” But everybody does the best they can. But what you don’t see that matters. The poor may lack savings, investments, or a retirement account. There’s unlikely there is a health care savings, emergency savings, a string of rental properties, a precious metal or valuable coin collection in the family. If you don’t see a spouse, it’s often because the 47% of the poor are more likely to be single.

If you criticize low-income parents with cell phones (mobile phones are almost a must-have to get and keep a job), name brand shoes (it’s a low-cost way of showing social status) and big-screen TVs (quality ones sell for under $500), you’re not looking in the right places. Yes, teenagers of middle and upper-class families also have those three things.

However, the same poor families with those supposed “frills” also are unable to: afford a vacation, pay all their monthly bills, an upgrade to a safer auto, to getting A/Cor heating for their homes or start planning for retirement. They don’t have enough money in their accounts to contract with a quality investment advisor to build a portfolio (their minimum amounts are often $500K). This means it is harder for the poor to get their money working for them.

(T/F) 5. America’s education system is mostly equal and fair, partly because we live in a meritocracy (a system based on effort and achievement).

FALSE. The education system is choking with ethnic and socioeconomic bias favoring middle- and upper-class whites and Asians. Not surprisingly, social and economic class is a far better predictor than education level of where someone ends up in society. Rich high school dropouts remain in the top quintile (14%) of wealth. Over 70% of dropouts will work at a family business with no diploma. Yet, 16% percent of poor college grads will stay stuck in the bottom quintile. Richard V. Reeves & Isabel V. Sawhill (2014). Equality of Opportunity: Definitions, Trends, and Interventions. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, https://www.bostonfed.org/inequality2014/papers/reeves-sawhill.pdf. Also see: David J. Harding, et al., (2005).“The Changing Effects of Family Background on the Incomes of American Adults,” in Unequal Chances: Family Background and Economic Success, edited by Samuel Bowles, Herbert Gintis, and Melissa Osborne Groves (New York: Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press, pp. 100–44.

(T/F) 6. Poor people value education about the same as those in middle class.

TRUE. On the surface, the poor often seem to or appear to value education less. Parents from poverty often show up at fewer school and teacher functions because of extended working hours, transportation scarcity and babysitting issues. That can create the illusion that parents don’t care. But the reality is that most (not all) poor parents have had kids in schools with fewer resources, lesser qualified teachers and marginal leaders.  They have seen their own children receive low expectations, constant biases, racism and get disciplined harshly. Yet, in spite of that, most do value education. Compton-Lilly, C. (2003). Reading families: The literate lives of urban children. New York: Teachers College Press.

(T/F) 7. It’s cheaper to be poor. The poor don’t have to pay for a lot of things that middle class and the wealthy have to pay for.

FALSE. In poor neighborhoods, the nearest grocery store (via walking or public transportation) is often a high-priced “mini-mart. Those stores lack a wider selection of healthier food (e.g. fresh vegetables). The poor may not be able to afford Internet or a home laptop, meaning they cannot research the best deals or lowest prices for consumer items. The poor may not be able to get the credit needed for catching sales in a short window. The cost of money is expensive, since the poor are less likely to have a savings or equity home line of credit.

The poor may have an unexpected expense of $300-1500 (to repair a car, pay for a wedding or funeral, pay for first and last month’s rent, etc.) with little or no savings. That means the poor might have to sell something or borrow money. If one sells, it’s done at a pawn shop where they get a terrible discount. If they borrow, it is usually at steep, unsecured interest rates. Again the payments get harder and harder to make. The middle and upper class could borrow cheaply from a home equity loan or use a savings account. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/2017-report-economic-well-being-us-households-201805.pdf

(T/F)  8. Most poor are unmotivated, lack ambition and more likely to be substance abusers than those in middle or upper class.

FALSE. On average, the poor work about the same number of hours per week as middle class. The overwhelming majority of SNAP (food stamps) recipients who can work do work. In fact, in the year after receiving SNAP benefits, over 80% of SNAP recipients worked.  More than eight of ten children from poor families have at least one employed parent. (National Center for Children in Poverty. (2004). Parental employment in low-income families. New York: Author. Taxwise, the middle and upper income get far more tax breaks. Rosenbaum, D. (2013). “The Relationship Between SNAP and Work Among Low-Income Households. Center on Budget and Household Priorities. https://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/1-29-13fa.pdf.

Regarding substance abuse, the data shows that the middle and upper class have more access to drugs (cannabis, alcohol, opioids, meth and prescriptions) , more money to spend on it but have less supervision and use it more. Diala, C. C., Muntaner, C., & Walrath, C. (2004). Gender, occupational, and socioeconomic correlates of alcohol and drug abuse among U.S. rural, metropolitan, and urban residents. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 30(2), 409–428. Lyman EL, Luthar SS. Further (2014). Evidence on the “Costs of Privilege”: Perfectionism in High-Achieving Youth at Socioeconomic Extremes. Psychol Sch. Nov; 51, 913-930. But what about actual usage? Substance abuse, alcohol abuse is clearly more prevalent among wealthy people than among poor people (Galea, S., Ahern, J., Tracy, M., & Vlahov, D. (2007) and Gallup Poll. (20158). Gallup Poll. (20158). Drinking Highest Among Educated, Upper-Income Americans. Accessed at: https://news.gallup.com/poll/184358/drinking-highest-among-educated-upper-income-americans.aspx and Galea, S., Ahern, J., Tracy, M., & Vlahov, D. (2007). Neighborhood Income and Income Distribution and the Use of Cigarettes, Alcohol, and Marijuana. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32, 195–202.

 (T/F) 9. Those in poverty with the highest rates of substance abuse, suicide and depression and with the lowest rates of college attendance are African Americans.

FALSE. Native American Indians have the highest incidence of dropouts, domestic violence, substance abuse, and depression. They also have the highest school dropout rates at 37 percent, and the lowest percentage of college attendance. They have the highest death rates from obesity, homicide, suicides, unintentional accidents and injuries.  Of young people who die between the ages of 10-20 years, 75 percent die from homicide and suicide. There’s one report of child abuse and neglect for every 30 American Indian and Alaska Native children. Seventy-five percent of the U.S. Attorney’s caseloads are American Indian sexual-abuse cases.

American Indians are overrepresented in the foster care system and the health care system. The Indian children compromise one percent of the population but have double that number in foster care.  Native American women suffer the highest rate of violent incidences — 50 percent higher than that of black males. The incarceration rate is 37 percent, with three out of every ten young people in jail, on probation or with other legal complications.

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders(5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing. And, Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. (2015). Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS): 2003-2013. National admissions to substance abuse treatment services. BHSIS Series S-75, HHS Publication No. (SMA) 15-4934. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. And, Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. (2016). 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed tables. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. And, Eitle DJ, Eitle TM. (2013). Methamphetamine use among rural White and Native American adolescents: an application of the stress process model. J Drug Educ. 43, 203-21. And, Libby AM, Orton HD, Beals J, Buchwald D, Manson SM; AI-SUPERPFP Team. (2008).Childhood abuse and later parenting outcomes in two American Indian tribes. Child Abuse Negl. 32, 195-211. And, Williams AS, Ge B, Petroski G, Kruse RL, McElroy JA, Koopman RJ. (2018). Socioeconomic Status and Other Factors Associated with Childhood Obesity. J Am Board Fam Med. 31, 514-521. And, Tomayko EJ, Mosso KL, Cronin KA, Carmichael L, Kim K, Parker T, Yaroch AL, Adams AK. (2017). Household food insecurity and dietary patterns in rural and urban American Indian families with young children. BMC Public Health. 30, 611.

 (T/F) 10. The poor get more government handouts than nonpoor and that’s part of what’s costing our Federal Budgets so much money.

FALSE: People from every socioeconomic class of society (over 90% of all Americans) are beneficiaries of government benefits. For some, the benefits are a series of tax deductions that poor cannot make such as a tax-deductible interest on home mortgage, for others it is business deductions that lower paying workers never receive. The earned income tax credit, use of offshore accounts, tax free insurance wealth-building tools or starting trusts (all are legal but are most likely are out the reach for the poor).  The rich have greater ease of mobility than the poor and can move to states or start and operate businesses in states with lower tax rates.

The poor pay less in federal income tax only because they don’t earn enough to qualify. But they do pay sales tax, excise and payroll tax (if they have a small business). The bottom 20 percent of income earners pay TWICE as much in taxes (as a share of their income) as do the top 1 percent.  On average, the lowest-income 20 percent of taxpayers face a state and local tax rate more than 50 percent higher than the top 1 percent of households. The nationwide average effective state and local tax rate is 11.4 percent for the lowest-income 20 percent of individuals and families, 9.9 percent for the middle 20 percent, and 7.4 percent for the top 1 percent. On average, the lowest-income 20% pay 7.1 percent in sales and excise tax, the middle 20% pay 4.8 percent and the top 1 percent pay a comparatively meager 0.9 percent rate of their income. Source: Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy, January 2013, at: https://itep.org/whopays/  In short, you can understand why there are so many biases that foster discrimination, classism and racism. The facts are that we all have some work to do.

© Eric Jensen • Permission granted to share this but never to sell this • jensenlearning.com