# data[].attributes.body
According to William H. Parrett and Kathleen M.  Budge, authors of Turning High-Poverty Schools into High-Performing Schools, it is possible, though "considerably complex" They say they are "models of the possible." These models "lead to optimism, hope, and self-efficacy."  (2020, p 2).

"Most students who drop out- more than 1 million a year in the United States" decide to drop out around ages 14-16 because of frustrations, struggle, minimal achievement, and failure, or other reasons. More than three million kids in America in high school will not graduate on time with their class (Parrett, Budge, 2020, p. 7).
Of course, not all students who drop out live in poverty, but a lot do. Many people continue to be "ambivalent about recognizing, let alone addressing the continued reality of significant achievement disparity in public schools" (Parret, Budge, 2020, p. 8).

An open mind, willingness to change, and leadership on your side are starting points for a change in these types of schools.

Leadership that is willing to take on this change is necessary and seems like the first step for a district to take after recognizing the problem. There are six questions that can "leverage points for building leadership capacity and collective efficacy:

1. How are we developing an inquiry stance and embedding reﬂection into professional practice?

2. How does our data system support data-informed problem solving?

3. How are we developing relational trust?

4. How are we deploying resources effectively?

5. How are we optimizing time?

6. How are we ensuring equity?" (Parret & Budge, 2020, p. 86).

For this change to be possible, leadership that has completely bought into the change and can guide, support, and lead their staff will be key. Other specific actions can be found in the next column.

# data[].attributes.headline
How Poverty Affects Classrooms | American Federation of Teachers (AFT)

# data[].attributes.subject
How Poverty Affects Classrooms | American Federation of Teachers (AFT)

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJ_dJ7G0Xvk

# data[].attributes.body
"One teachers story about a remarkable change that made her see poverty in a new way." (American Federation of Teachers).

This school took the assets of the community and made sure their students had what they need. Dental and medical clinics are provided as well as sending food and toiletries home with families.

# data[].attributes.body
How a Great School is Breaking the Cycle of Poverty in America's Poorest City

Go to http://reason.com/reasontv for downloadable versions.

Jan 27, 2015.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How a Great School is Breaking the Cycle of Poverty in America's Poorest City

# data[].attributes.body
Federal Safety Net http://federalsafetynet.com/poverty-definition.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The definition of Poverty is living without the basic necessities of life - food, clothing or housing.

In undeveloped countries of the world poverty means living on less than $1.90 per day. This is a level set by the World Bank, and is defined as "extreme" poverty. The World Bank estimates about 10% of the population of the world lives under this threshold, or about 700 million people. They often have unsafe drinking water, have no access to education and have a short life expectancy [i].

In developed countries the definition of poverty starts with much higher standards and generally does not involve unsafe water or life threatening living conditions. In the United States the definition of poverty is an individual with income less than $36 per day or a family of four with income less than $72 per day. This is calculated from the poverty threshold as set by the U.S. Census Bureau. - See Poverty Threshold Page.

magazine in an article entitled "How Many Americans live on $2.00 a day", concludes that the total is 336,000 people or about .1% of the population [i]. The Economist believes the calculation most likely misses America's homeless population. That could total a half million more people representing another .2% of the population (See Homeless Page). The Federal Safety Net of the United generally keeps people out of extreme poverty (see Safety Net Page). American's that are in extreme poverty often don't have the wherewithal to navigate the federal system often due to mental illness or addiction. It is one of the problems with the Federal Safety Net (more on Welfare Issues Page).

You have to hand it to Mollie Orshansky of the Social Security Administration. For over 50 years, her definition of poverty has held up. In 1963 she established a definition of poverty as she worked on a research project about poverty and children. At that time there was no standard to measure poverty, so she created one. She started with the cost of a minimum food diet, according to the Department of Agriculture. She figured that if you can't feed yourself adequately, then you are in poverty. She further postulated that food should be only one-third of a household budget, because that was the average experience of families at the time. Then voila! A poverty threshold surfaced. Below that income level, a person or family was "in poverty" and above it was not.
​
Orshansky grew up poor and was the first in her family to go to college, where she got a degree in mathematics and statistics. She once said, "If I write about the poor, I don't need a good imagination - I have a good memory." She worked as an economist and statistician for 40 years for the federal government and died at the age of 91 [iii].

Orshansky never intended for her simple calculation to be used as the definition of poverty in America for 50 years, but that is exactly what happened. And why not? It is very useful to have an income cutoff that defines poverty and lets us see how many people are below that number. That is why Orshansky's method has lasted so long. Her calculation of poverty has been increased by the cost of living over the past 50 years, but otherwise her numbers are the foundation for defining poverty to this day.

[i] The World Bank. Understanding Poverty. [Internet]. Retrieved April 3, 2021. Available here.

[ii] The Economist Magazine. "How Many Americans live on $2.00 a day". June 20, 2019. [Internet] Available here.

[iii] Mollie Orshansky, 1965, "Counting the Poor: Another Look at the Poverty Profile," Social Security Bulletin (January). Available here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The definition of Poverty is living without the basic necessities of life - food, clothing or housing. In undeveloped countries of the world poverty means living on less than $1.90 per day. This is a level set by the World Bank, and is defined as "extreme" poverty.

# data[].attributes.body
What is poverty? Who lives in poverty? These questions are further explored in chapter three of the text, "Turning High-Poverty Schools into High-Performing Schools" by William H. Parrett and Kathleen M. Budge. They say "poverty is not easily defined" and its causes can't be simply explained. Anyone can experience it-- all genders, ethnic groups, and ages (2020, p. 46). They go on to say that they believe its "important to understand in the context of their efforts to improve academic achievement and other measures of school-related success for children who live in poverty" (2020, p. 47).

Federal Safety net defines poverty in the United States as, "an individual with income less than $36 per day or a family of four with income less than $72 per day. This is calculated from the poverty threshold as set by the U.S. Census Bureau." A simple definition could be, "living without the basic necessities of life – food, clothing or housing" (Federal Safety Net).

"Childhood poverty rates are higher in the United States than in any other industrialized country, and this rate has decreased only slightly since 2010, the middle of the Great Recession."  (Parrett, Budge, 2020, p. 50).

The image below is taken from page 51 of Parrett & Budges' book to show the demographics of poverty.

# data[].attributes.body
In schools, students have different labels of poverty they can fall under. There are low income families, free or reduced lunch eligible students, the economically disadvantaged, and the low socioeconomic status (low SES). The authors of the main text by Parrett and Budge encourage educators to reflect on the labels they use when describing their students because these words matter. "Poverty shapes one's view of self and others" and it "affects many of the basic necessities that people of middle-and upper-income levels tend to take for granted" (2020, p. 48).   Image below taken from https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/01/07/461595631/how-to-help-kids-in-poverty-adjust-to-the-stability-of-school-after-break

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Is your school focusing on all three kinds of learning? Are you making the most of the links between the three? Use the "Focusing on Student, Professional, and System-Level Learning" rubric (right) to guide your reading and to help you reflect on the current situation in your school.

The following five questions can help support leaders as they make the three learning agendas the focus of their actions:

Question 1: Does our instructional framework guide curricula, teaching, assessment, and the learning environment?

What is an instructional framework? In the broadest sense, it consists of the theories, policies, structures, processes, and practices used in a school to guide what happens in the classroom. A well-designed instructional framework helps provide a common vision of what excellent (or powerful) teaching looks like.

Leaders in HP/HP schools credit much of their success to a high level of coherence in the instructional program. Several of the schools that we studied began their improvement efforts by adopting a Comprehensive School Reform model, but later customized that model to better fit their needs. Schools also used a homegrown approach that emphasized higher-order questioning, development of academic vocabulary, reading across the curriculum, and common classroom-based assessments. Whether using an established model or a homegrown approach, schools commonly developed communities of practice (Wenger, 1998), groups of people who work together over a period of time. These groups are neither teams nor task forces -- they are peers held together by a common sense of purpose and a real need to know what one another knows. This collaborative structure enabled schools to create, implement, continuously improve, and sustain a coherent instructional framework.

Too often, schools continue to use "a pedagogy of poverty" (Haberman, 1991; Padrón, Waxman, & Rivera, 2002): ineffective practices characterized as an overuse of teacher-controlled discussions and decision making, lecture, drill and decontextualized practice, and worksheets. Rather than a pedagogy of poverty, what students who live in poverty need is powerful pedagogy: powerful instruction resulting in powerful (or deep) learning. Such pedagogy is:

Consistent with a large body of research related to how people learn (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2002) and is relevant to the learner (Brandt, 1998)

Meaning centered (Knapp & Adelman, 1995)

Supporting the development of various kinds of understanding (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005)

Accelerated, strength-based, and empowering (Levin, 1989)

Encompassing higher-order thinking, deep knowledge, and connections beyond classrooms (Newman et al., 1996)

Finally, the school-related factor that makes the most difference in the lives of students who live in poverty (or all students, for that matter) is the quality of teaching that occurs in the classroom. Effective teachers:

1. Have caring relationships with students

2. Set high standards and help students reach them

3. Connect the curriculum to students' lives

4. Participate in ongoing professional development (Fry & DeWit, 2010)

Question 2: Do we provide targeted interventions for students who need them?

Even with the development of a comprehensive instructional framework that leads to improvement in the quality of classroom teaching and learning, underachieving students who live in poverty may need additional support. Catching up often means more time and specific strategies aimed at the unique needs of individual students. Too often, for too many students in poverty, the need for additional support has resulted in referral and placement in special education programs (Howard, Dresser, & Dunklee, 2009). With the advent of Response to Intervention (RTI), however, many schools have been able to meet students' needs by restructuring the instructional day to provide them with additional time and support.

High-performing, high-poverty schools have long been systematically providing targeted support for students within and outside the traditional school day, week, or year. All HP/HP schools constantly review data to identify students who need:

Before-, during-, and after-school small-group and individual tutoring

Self-paced interventions using technology

One-on-one academic advising and coaching

Homework support

Additional assessment time

Question 3: Are all students proficient in reading?

Second only to safety, ensuring that all students develop literacy skills reflects a core priority in high-performing, high-poverty schools. As a principal at a middle school in the South put it, "We start with reading and end with reading. There's a lot of content and important stuff in between, but if our kids can't read at grade level, they'll never do as well as they could or should with the rest." Designing a comprehensive approach to reading improvement entails:

Conducting an analysis of students' unique needs (e.g., those of English-language learners)

Developing an understanding of the influence of poverty on reading achievement (Neuman, 2008)

Examining the research base, especially concerning adolescent literacy (see Slavin, Cheung, Groff, & Lake, 2008)

When students do not learn to read by third grade or develop reading difficulties after third grade, as is disproportionately the case for students living in poverty (Kieffer, 2010), it is critically important that an emphasis on learning to read remain an instructional priority in upper-elementary classrooms as well as in middle and high schools. At the secondary level, this often requires supplanting an elective in a student's schedule to provide explicit reading instruction, which can present a dilemma for middle and high school leaders and teachers.

Reading, like any other skill, requires practice to improve. Although it's not an easy undertaking, HP/HP schools find ways to motivate students to read. After students have read one million words at Dayton's Bluff, the entire school celebrates. Former Principal Andrew Collins explains: "We kick off our Million Word Campaign in the fall. Students pledge to read one million words, and when we've reached the goal, all 400 kids with noisemakers, staff, and community partners parade through the streets."

Question 4: Are we using research-based models for professional learning and encouraging reflective practice?

Leaders in high-performing, high-poverty schools hold a view similar to this one expressed by a superintendent in a Northwest school district: "There is a bright red thread running from every student-learning problem to a problem of practice for teachers, and finally to a problem of practice for leaders." Professional learning and student learning are two sides of the same coin -- they cannot be separated. Many HP/HP schools, including those we studied, are either engaged in the process of developing common assessments or have begun using them within the context of a community of practice. During this work, as students' needs are identified, so too are the learning needs of the adults in the school.

Most of the HP/HP schools were also supporting professional learning through various types of walk-through processes. At Osmond A. Church, principals and teachers were engaged in conducting instructional rounds. The school's principal used a modified version of the model described in Instructional Rounds in Education: A Networking Approach to Improving Teaching and Learning (City, Elmore, Fiarman, & Teitel, 2009) to meet the teachers' needs.

In addition to the approaches described here, several other structures and processes are effective in supporting professional learning and promoting reflective practices. These include:

Action research

Lesson study

Case-based learning

Networks

Journaling

Portfolio development

Tuning protocols

High-performing, high-poverty schools constantly endeavor to enhance professional capacity to better meet the needs of their students. The adults in these schools take their own learning as seriously as their students' learning, understanding they are truly two sides of the same coin. As one teacher explained, "When I learn to do something better, it helps a lot of my kids. We all know this and continually work to find the time it takes."

Question 5: Are we engaging in continuous data-based inquiry as a school?

All high-performing, high-poverty schools engage in some form of data-based decision making at the school level. This process typically involves:

Identification of a problem

Data gathering and analysis

Goal setting

Strategy selection and implementation

Evaluation

Although this form of planning is likely to be used in many schools, what distinguishes HP/HP schools from others is the manner in which such a cycle of inquiry has become the norm. Second only to the development of caring relationships in the schools that we studied, the use of data was credited for much of their success. These schools are places where people tend to be very curious about their practice and are eager to innovate. They continuously seek or create solutions to the challenges posed by poverty and are encouraged to take risks. Principals of these schools play a key role in driving this work.

Action Advice

Create coherence in the instructional program. Is your curriculum aligned to state and district standards? Have you articulated the curriculum across subjects and grade levels? Have you identified benchmark standards?

Employ a powerful pedagogy. Are students primarily engaged in meaning making, developing various kinds of understanding, problem solving, reasoning, inquiry, and critical/creative thinking?

Develop a shared vision of what good teaching looks like. Can all teachers describe a community-held understanding of good teaching? Can they list a core set of indications related to what teachers do and what students do when good teaching happens?

Use research-based teaching strategies that specifically address the needs of students living in poverty. Do teachers know which instructional strategies have a solid research base? Do teachers have the required expertise to employ research-based strategies?

Develop assessment literacy. Do teachers understand and employ sound assessment practices? Do principals have the competencies necessary to improve assessment practices schoolwide?

Involve students in assessing their learning. Are students engaged in activities that help them assess and monitor their own learning?

Develop and use common formative and summative assessments. Have benchmark standards been identified? Have teachers been provided collaboration opportunities to both develop assessments and use the information gained to inform instruction?

Ensure that teachers develop and demonstrate attributes and functions leading to success with students living in poverty. Do teachers know which teacher attributes and functions lead to success? Do teachers possess these attributes and fulfill such functions?

Provide targeted interventions when needed. Does your school use data to identify students who need additional support? Has time been scheduled during, before, or after the school day to provide extra help for students?

Develop reading proficiency in all students. How many students are not proficient in reading by fourth grade? Is reading taught when needed after the elementary years?

Link professional learning to student learning and employ research-based models. Do students' learning needs drive the content for professional development? Do professional development models support the development of communities of practice, prompting reflection and inquiry?

Engage in continuous data-based inquiry. Is inquiry embedded in how the school does business? Are people curious, eager to innovate, and encouraged to take risks?

Notes

Brandt, R. (1998). Powerful learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (2002). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

City, E.A., Elmore, R.F., Fiarman, S.E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education: A network approach to improving teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Fry, S., & DeWit, K. (2010). "Once a struggling student." Educational Leadership, 68(4), pp.70-73.

Haberman, M. (1991). "The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching." Phi Delta Kappan, 73(4), pp.290-294.

Howard, T., Dresser, S.G., & Dunklee, D.R. (2009). Poverty is not a learning disability: Equalizing opportunities for low SES students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Kieffer, M. (2010). "Socioeconomic status, English proficiency, and late-emerging reading difficulties." Educational Researcher, 39(6), pp.484-486.

Knapp, M.S., & Adelman, N. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high-poverty classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.

Levin, H.M. (1989). Accelerated schools: A new strategy for at-risk students. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Education Policy Center.

Neuman, S.B. (2008). Educating the other America: Top experts tackle poverty, literacy, and achievement in our schools. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Newmann, F.M., & Associates (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Padrón, Y.N., Waxman, H.C., & Rivera, H.H. (2002). Educating Hispanic students: Obstacles and avenues to improved academic achievement. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education Diversity & Excellence.

Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wiggins, G.P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Questions That Promote Student Success in High-Poverty Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is your school focusing on all three kinds of learning? Are you making the most of the links between the three? Use the "Focusing on Student, Professional, and System-Level Learning" rubric (right) to guide your reading and to help you reflect on the current situation in your school.

# data[].attributes.headline
5 Questions That Promote Student Success in High-Poverty Schools

# data[].attributes.subject
5 Questions That Promote Student Success in High-Poverty Schools

# data[].attributes.body
The link below used Parrett & Budges' work to narrow down the list found below into five questions if schools want to take initiative to make their high poverty school high performing.

"1. Does our instructional framework guide curricula, teaching, assessment, and the learning environment?

2. Do we provide targeted interventions for students who need them?

3. Are all students proficient in reading?

4. Are we using research-based models for professional learning and encouraging reflective practice?

5. Are we engaging in continuous data-based inquiry as a school?

EduTopia also gives detailed tips and explicit actions called "Action Advice" that would be very helpful.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Is your school focusing on all three kinds of learning? Are you making the most of the links between the three? Use the "Focusing on Student, Professional, and System-Level Learning" rubric (right) to guide your reading and to help you reflect on the current situation in your school.

The following five questions can help support leaders as they make the three learning agendas the focus of their actions:

Question 1: Does our instructional framework guide curricula, teaching, assessment, and the learning environment?

What is an instructional framework? In the broadest sense, it consists of the theories, policies, structures, processes, and practices used in a school to guide what happens in the classroom. A well-designed instructional framework helps provide a common vision of what excellent (or powerful) teaching looks like.

Leaders in HP/HP schools credit much of their success to a high level of coherence in the instructional program. Several of the schools that we studied began their improvement efforts by adopting a Comprehensive School Reform model, but later customized that model to better fit their needs. Schools also used a homegrown approach that emphasized higher-order questioning, development of academic vocabulary, reading across the curriculum, and common classroom-based assessments. Whether using an established model or a homegrown approach, schools commonly developed communities of practice (Wenger, 1998), groups of people who work together over a period of time. These groups are neither teams nor task forces -- they are peers held together by a common sense of purpose and a real need to know what one another knows. This collaborative structure enabled schools to create, implement, continuously improve, and sustain a coherent instructional framework.

Too often, schools continue to use "a pedagogy of poverty" (Haberman, 1991; Padrón, Waxman, & Rivera, 2002): ineffective practices characterized as an overuse of teacher-controlled discussions and decision making, lecture, drill and decontextualized practice, and worksheets. Rather than a pedagogy of poverty, what students who live in poverty need is powerful pedagogy: powerful instruction resulting in powerful (or deep) learning. Such pedagogy is:

Consistent with a large body of research related to how people learn (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2002) and is relevant to the learner (Brandt, 1998)

Meaning centered (Knapp & Adelman, 1995)

Supporting the development of various kinds of understanding (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005)

Accelerated, strength-based, and empowering (Levin, 1989)

Encompassing higher-order thinking, deep knowledge, and connections beyond classrooms (Newman et al., 1996)

Finally, the school-related factor that makes the most difference in the lives of students who live in poverty (or all students, for that matter) is the quality of teaching that occurs in the classroom. Effective teachers:

1. Have caring relationships with students

2. Set high standards and help students reach them

3. Connect the curriculum to students' lives

4. Participate in ongoing professional development (Fry & DeWit, 2010)

Question 2: Do we provide targeted interventions for students who need them?

Even with the development of a comprehensive instructional framework that leads to improvement in the quality of classroom teaching and learning, underachieving students who live in poverty may need additional support. Catching up often means more time and specific strategies aimed at the unique needs of individual students. Too often, for too many students in poverty, the need for additional support has resulted in referral and placement in special education programs (Howard, Dresser, & Dunklee, 2009). With the advent of Response to Intervention (RTI), however, many schools have been able to meet students' needs by restructuring the instructional day to provide them with additional time and support.

High-performing, high-poverty schools have long been systematically providing targeted support for students within and outside the traditional school day, week, or year. All HP/HP schools constantly review data to identify students who need:

Before-, during-, and after-school small-group and individual tutoring

Self-paced interventions using technology

One-on-one academic advising and coaching

Homework support

Additional assessment time

Question 3: Are all students proficient in reading?

Second only to safety, ensuring that all students develop literacy skills reflects a core priority in high-performing, high-poverty schools. As a principal at a middle school in the South put it, "We start with reading and end with reading. There's a lot of content and important stuff in between, but if our kids can't read at grade level, they'll never do as well as they could or should with the rest." Designing a comprehensive approach to reading improvement entails:

Conducting an analysis of students' unique needs (e.g., those of English-language learners)

Developing an understanding of the influence of poverty on reading achievement (Neuman, 2008)

Examining the research base, especially concerning adolescent literacy (see Slavin, Cheung, Groff, & Lake, 2008)

When students do not learn to read by third grade or develop reading difficulties after third grade, as is disproportionately the case for students living in poverty (Kieffer, 2010), it is critically important that an emphasis on learning to read remain an instructional priority in upper-elementary classrooms as well as in middle and high schools. At the secondary level, this often requires supplanting an elective in a student's schedule to provide explicit reading instruction, which can present a dilemma for middle and high school leaders and teachers.

Reading, like any other skill, requires practice to improve. Although it's not an easy undertaking, HP/HP schools find ways to motivate students to read. After students have read one million words at Dayton's Bluff, the entire school celebrates. Former Principal Andrew Collins explains: "We kick off our Million Word Campaign in the fall. Students pledge to read one million words, and when we've reached the goal, all 400 kids with noisemakers, staff, and community partners parade through the streets."

Question 4: Are we using research-based models for professional learning and encouraging reflective practice?

Leaders in high-performing, high-poverty schools hold a view similar to this one expressed by a superintendent in a Northwest school district: "There is a bright red thread running from every student-learning problem to a problem of practice for teachers, and finally to a problem of practice for leaders." Professional learning and student learning are two sides of the same coin -- they cannot be separated. Many HP/HP schools, including those we studied, are either engaged in the process of developing common assessments or have begun using them within the context of a community of practice. During this work, as students' needs are identified, so too are the learning needs of the adults in the school.

Most of the HP/HP schools were also supporting professional learning through various types of walk-through processes. At Osmond A. Church, principals and teachers were engaged in conducting instructional rounds. The school's principal used a modified version of the model described in Instructional Rounds in Education: A Networking Approach to Improving Teaching and Learning (City, Elmore, Fiarman, & Teitel, 2009) to meet the teachers' needs.

In addition to the approaches described here, several other structures and processes are effective in supporting professional learning and promoting reflective practices. These include:

Action research

Lesson study

Case-based learning

Networks

Journaling

Portfolio development

Tuning protocols

High-performing, high-poverty schools constantly endeavor to enhance professional capacity to better meet the needs of their students. The adults in these schools take their own learning as seriously as their students' learning, understanding they are truly two sides of the same coin. As one teacher explained, "When I learn to do something better, it helps a lot of my kids. We all know this and continually work to find the time it takes."

Question 5: Are we engaging in continuous data-based inquiry as a school?

All high-performing, high-poverty schools engage in some form of data-based decision making at the school level. This process typically involves:

Identification of a problem

Data gathering and analysis

Goal setting

Strategy selection and implementation

Evaluation

Although this form of planning is likely to be used in many schools, what distinguishes HP/HP schools from others is the manner in which such a cycle of inquiry has become the norm. Second only to the development of caring relationships in the schools that we studied, the use of data was credited for much of their success. These schools are places where people tend to be very curious about their practice and are eager to innovate. They continuously seek or create solutions to the challenges posed by poverty and are encouraged to take risks. Principals of these schools play a key role in driving this work.

Action Advice

Create coherence in the instructional program. Is your curriculum aligned to state and district standards? Have you articulated the curriculum across subjects and grade levels? Have you identified benchmark standards?

Employ a powerful pedagogy. Are students primarily engaged in meaning making, developing various kinds of understanding, problem solving, reasoning, inquiry, and critical/creative thinking?

Develop a shared vision of what good teaching looks like. Can all teachers describe a community-held understanding of good teaching? Can they list a core set of indications related to what teachers do and what students do when good teaching happens?

Use research-based teaching strategies that specifically address the needs of students living in poverty. Do teachers know which instructional strategies have a solid research base? Do teachers have the required expertise to employ research-based strategies?

Develop assessment literacy. Do teachers understand and employ sound assessment practices? Do principals have the competencies necessary to improve assessment practices schoolwide?

Involve students in assessing their learning. Are students engaged in activities that help them assess and monitor their own learning?

Develop and use common formative and summative assessments. Have benchmark standards been identified? Have teachers been provided collaboration opportunities to both develop assessments and use the information gained to inform instruction?

Ensure that teachers develop and demonstrate attributes and functions leading to success with students living in poverty. Do teachers know which teacher attributes and functions lead to success? Do teachers possess these attributes and fulfill such functions?

Provide targeted interventions when needed. Does your school use data to identify students who need additional support? Has time been scheduled during, before, or after the school day to provide extra help for students?

Develop reading proficiency in all students. How many students are not proficient in reading by fourth grade? Is reading taught when needed after the elementary years?

Link professional learning to student learning and employ research-based models. Do students' learning needs drive the content for professional development? Do professional development models support the development of communities of practice, prompting reflection and inquiry?

Engage in continuous data-based inquiry. Is inquiry embedded in how the school does business? Are people curious, eager to innovate, and encouraged to take risks?

Notes

Brandt, R. (1998). Powerful learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (2002). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

City, E.A., Elmore, R.F., Fiarman, S.E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education: A network approach to improving teaching and learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Fry, S., & DeWit, K. (2010). "Once a struggling student." Educational Leadership, 68(4), pp.70-73.

Haberman, M. (1991). "The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching." Phi Delta Kappan, 73(4), pp.290-294.

Howard, T., Dresser, S.G., & Dunklee, D.R. (2009). Poverty is not a learning disability: Equalizing opportunities for low SES students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Kieffer, M. (2010). "Socioeconomic status, English proficiency, and late-emerging reading difficulties." Educational Researcher, 39(6), pp.484-486.

Knapp, M.S., & Adelman, N. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high-poverty classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.

Levin, H.M. (1989). Accelerated schools: A new strategy for at-risk students. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Education Policy Center.

Neuman, S.B. (2008). Educating the other America: Top experts tackle poverty, literacy, and achievement in our schools. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Newmann, F.M., & Associates (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Padrón, Y.N., Waxman, H.C., & Rivera, H.H. (2002). Educating Hispanic students: Obstacles and avenues to improved academic achievement. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education Diversity & Excellence.

Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wiggins, G.P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Questions That Promote Student Success in High-Poverty Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is your school focusing on all three kinds of learning? Are you making the most of the links between the three? Use the "Focusing on Student, Professional, and System-Level Learning" rubric (right) to guide your reading and to help you reflect on the current situation in your school.

# data[].attributes.headline
Risks and Harmfulness of Not Performing Well

# data[].attributes.subject
Risks and Harmfulness of Not Performing Well

# data[].attributes.body
Reports exist saying that many states "short change" high-poverty schools because of test scores allow how much funding  that school can acquire. If the district is poor, that doesn't bode well for funding either. "Poor districts get far less money than needed to help students achieve average scores on standardized tests, and a financial analysis shows that higher test scores follow the money, says a new national report" (Mezzacappa, 2018).

Poverty greatly influences the lives of our students as well as the learning and funding stated above. First, damaging stereotypes, living conditions, food insecurity, health and well being, housing instability, family stress and trauma, and many other areas of their lives. (Parrett, Budge, 2020, p. 54-57).

# data[].attributes.body
It could be said that high poverty/high performing  (HP/HP) schools have the characteristics listed in the previous column and are the same eight things you can do to effectively educate students from poverty. It is likely that the leadership is strong and supportive, there is family and community involvement, high expectations, reading proficiency is prioritized,  rigorous curriculum and high quality instruction are in place, and the schools make good use of their time (Parrett, Budge, 2020, p 9).

# data[].attributes.body
"In the early 1990s, Gloria Bonilla-Santiago hatched a plan to create an alternative school for families in the impoverished city of Camden, New Jersey, who were desperate to avoid sending their kids to the city's abysmal public system." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFiCDdixweg

This is a charter school, but I think it has some beneficial and inspirational information about what can happen when families and the community rally around education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How a Great School is Breaking the Cycle of Poverty in America's Poorest City

# data[].attributes.headline
Report finds most states shortchange high-poverty schools | The Notebook article via Chalkbeat.com

# data[].attributes.subject
Report finds most states shortchange high-poverty schools | The Notebook article via Chalkbeat.com

# data[].attributes.body
https://philadelphia.chalkbeat.org/2018/3/22/22186869/report-finds-most-states-short-change-high-poverty-schools By Dale Mezzacappa  Mar 22, 2018, 10:24am EDT

# data[].attributes.headline
Eight Practices to Improve a Low Performing High Poverty school: 

# data[].attributes.subject
Eight Practices to Improve a Low Performing High Poverty school: 

# data[].attributes.body
-Effective leadership in the school and district ( as discussed in the previous column).
-Good parent and community relationships
-Having high expectations
-Prioritizing reading skills while targeting low performing students
-Looking deeply at curriculum continuously, "aligning, monitoring and managing" (Parrett, Budge, 2020, p 9).
-Making sure high quality instruction is sustained
-Making sure time is optimized and reorganizing space and transitional time

# data[].attributes.headline
Turning High-Poverty Schools into High-Performing Schools

# data[].attributes.subject
Turning High-Poverty Schools into High-Performing Schools

# data[].attributes.body
Parrett, William H., and Kathleen M. Budge. Turning High-Poverty Schools into High-Performing Schools, Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/harding-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6176500.