Protecting Financially Disadvantaged Students’ Educational Rights

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Advancing Responsible Adolescent Development book series (ARAD)

Abstract

This chapter explores some of the most persistent obstacles faced by impoverished students attending American schools. In particular, it considers a variety of myths surrounding students and families in poverty and how research has debunked these misperceptions. The chapter subsequently considers how, with the emergence of new social science understandings, educators and activists are in a better position to recommend and implement measures of success which would more appropriately assess student achievement than the currently widely preferred methods. The chapter ends with several recommendations for minimizing the opportunity gap between impoverished students and their financially stable peers, culminating in an assessment of necessary legal reform and legislative action.

Keywords

Students Poverty Standardized testing Achievement gap Culture of poverty 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Berlak, H. (2001). Standardized testing is racist. Rethinking Schools, 15(4), 29–32.Google Scholar
  2. Brittenham, K. (2004). Equal protection theory and the Harvey milk high school: Why anti-subordination alone is not enough. Boston College Law Review, 45(4), 869–904.Google Scholar
  3. Cavazos, S., & Elliott, S. (2015, January 4). The basics of school funding in Indiana: Difficulty defining fairness. Retrieved Dec 2015, from http://in.chalkbeat.org/2015/04/30/wealthiest-schools-thrive-under-new-state-budget-while-poor-ones-mostly-get-less/
  4. Compton-Lilly, C. (2003). Reading families: The literate lives of urban children (p. 156). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  5. Easton, L. B., & Soguero, M. (2011). Challenging assumptions: Helping struggling students succeed. The Phi Delta Kappan, 92(5), 27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Epstein, M. G. (1973). Standardized tests can measure the right things. The Mathematics Teacher, 66(4), 294–366.Google Scholar
  7. Ferriss, A. L. (1970). Indicators of change in the American family. Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  8. Gorski, P. (2008). The myth of the culture of poverty. Educational Leadership, 65(7), 32–36.Google Scholar
  9. Gorski, P. (2013). Reaching and teaching students in poverty: Strategies for erasing the opportunity gap. New York, NY: Teachers College.Google Scholar
  10. Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966).Google Scholar
  11. Kenyon, D. (2007). The property tax-school funding dilemma.Google Scholar
  12. Kiger, D. M. (2005). The effect of group test-taking environment on standardized achievement test scores: A randomized block field trial. American Secondary Education, 33(2), 63–72.Google Scholar
  13. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944).Google Scholar
  14. McDonald v. Board of Election Commissioners, 394 U.S. 802 (1969).Google Scholar
  15. Quinto, F., & McKenna, B. (1977). Alternatives to standardized testing. Washington, DC: National Education Association, Division of Instruction and Professional Development.Google Scholar
  16. San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973).Google Scholar
  17. Wanker, W. P., & Christie, K. (2005). State implementation of the no child left behind act. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(2), 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Maurer School of LawIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations