Addressing the Effects of Poverty Is as Important as ‘Standards’

Article Tools
  • PrintPrinter-Friendly
  • EmailEmail Article
  • ReprintReprints

To the Editor:

It was gratifying to read William A. Proefriedt’s Commentary "Outsider in the Locker Room" (Dec. 6, 2006) after so many years of suppression of the opinions, views, and, indeed, even the research findings of all those educators who attempt to discuss socioeconomic-status factors in student achievement, only to be ruthlessly shouted down.

Teachers who are willing to speak of these issues are told in a variety of ways that they are not confident in the abilities of students who have historically done poorly in school, or have left without graduating. Worse, it might be implied that these teachers are racists who hold negative views about the children of ethnic minorities. All to support the notion that simply upholding standards, planning lessons “aligned” with standards, and measuring outcomes according to the standards is enough. Mention children who lack sufficient food, sleep, or a place to call home, who have no books or access to books, or suffer the effects of poverty in other ways, and you may find yourself accused of espousing a deficit view of them.

I concur with others who believe that the nation’s children would be far better served by investment in initiatives to address poverty than in more standards programs or standardized testing in schools.

Juliet Luther
Bilingual Educator/ESL Specialist
Bronx, N.Y.

Vol. 26, Issue 18, Page 29

Published in Print: January 10, 2007, as Addressing Poverty is as Important as 'Standards'
Related Stories

Back to Top Back to Top

Most Popular Stories