The Crisis of Black Male Joblessness in Milwaukee: Trends, Explanations, and Policy Options. Who designed the joblessness and who is responsible?
http://www4.uwm.edu/letsci/history/faculty/levine.cfm
Monday, December 6, 2010
Sunday, December 5, 2010
CURRENT BIO Extra!
A brief philosophical and service values resume
LEON TODD
3447 N 47th Street
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
53216-3334
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
53216-3334
414-444-9490 FAX 414-444-3997
E-Mail: leontodd@execpc.com
Bio Extra!
Todd is also an outspoken critic of Ebonics, Afrocentric Curricula and multicultural education. He has receive the 'Oreo Cookie of the Year' award from angry black constituents opposing his resolutions to curtail the teaching of race specific education as a basis for self-esteem at a local school board public hearing. After another school board meeting, his home was firebombed with a molotov cocktail approximately 45 minutes after the Milwaukee school board pass a motion to set standards for ethnic
heritage (afrocentric) education and to audit the afrocentric cultural immersion schools. The motion was based on Todd's resolutions to curtail the spurious, religious and sometimes racist teaching of african centered education within the context of public education. Todd, along with other school board members, was recently pelted with raw eggs at a board meeting for his decision to support a certified and well qualified white superintendent for MPS leadership against an unqualified black candidate.
Todd is most often considered to have conservative values in regards to education, fiscal and economic standards as well as . His stands opposing afrocentric intellectual segregation curricula, favoring personal pro-life values, favoring a true love waits position for young adults, and his pro phonics stands are examples of his postions that have challenged the liberal school of thought. Todd does not believe in multiculturalism of a divided America nor does he believe in Intellectual Segregation of afrocentric curricula. He does not believe in inventive spelling or inventive composition of the current liberal direction in schooling children. Todd is socially a liberal as well as liberal in his support for the individual values of civil liberties as contained in the First 10 Amendments of the Constitution over the conservative institutions of state, government, corporations and even church hierarchy. Todd believes these institutions are necessary as long as they are transparent in their dealing and do not curb the values that whistle blowers bring to an open society.
Detailed newspaper accounts are available upon request via e-mail or simply over the internet just by Googling: Leon Todd Milwaukee. For a professional resume e-mail Leon Todd at. FaceBook.com, Blooger.com, MySpace.com all contain numerous accounts that detail the life, experiences and philosophy of Leon W Todd; Jr.
--------------------–
When I was 30
Leon Todd
Part of MPS' 'golden age'
By Joe Ahlers
MKE Magazine
Posted: Feb. 15, 2007
Leon Todd was ready for corporate America, but he wasn't sure corporate America was ready for Leon Todd.
Although groups like the Ford Foundation were encouraging black families to move north to work on production lines, even a young, educated black man like Todd didn't think his career would go any further than barber, funeral director, craftsman or minister.
Todd was, after all, the only black student in his middle and high school classes. When he enrolled at Northwestern Lutheran College in Watertown, school officials had to tackle an ordinance forbidding blacks from sleeping overnight in the city.
"You experienced life separately," Todd said. "The civil rights consciousness of being a second-class citizen with all the limitations blacks had - secondhand bubblers and bathrooms - it was something you just had to accommodate yourself to."
Todd accepted an offer to attend the UW-Madison business school for graduate work, unsure how his mostly-white counterparts would see him, and he was convinced no one would hire him after graduation. Success, however, eventually found its way to Todd in ways he hadn't imagined.
His first professional job came just months before he turned 30. Three years later in 1973, he ran (unsuccessfully) for the Milwaukee Public School Board. "It was like the Supreme Court. They already had their token black. Room for one, regardless of the population," Todd said.
He was elected to his first term on the board in '75, a time he calls MPS' "golden age."
"We were very progressive in our thinking about public education," he said. "(Milwaukee) was just beginning to have real racial problems, but MPS was at its peak."
Todd has experienced his share of controversy, including a firebombing of his house in the 1990s and having a politician say he should be hanged for "betraying" the black community.
Today, Todd is running again - in the Feb. 20 primary election for the School Board.
"I want to . . . return the best years of public education to Milwaukee," Todd said.
When he turned 30 Nov. 11, 1970.
Who he was then Finance project manager, Wisconsin Telephone Co.
Who he is now Age 66, retired business technology consultant. Married to Barbara with four kids: Sara, Leon Jr., Emily and Ann.
Education Todd graduated from Wisconsin Lutheran College with a degree in Latin and Greek classics, an MBA from UW-Madison and a master's in cultural foundations and education from UW-Milwaukee.
Nazis in MPS In a debate over whether MPS should start a German immersion school, a group of Nazis asked the board to separate the races. "I remember sitting at School Board meetings and hearing about how my brain weighed less than the average white brain." While some board members literally turned their backs on the Nazis, Todd listened despite whole-heartedly disagreeing. "This is a democracy . . . because of the experiences and struggles with race relations I had been through, I made the effort to listen to (all ) people."
Magnet schools During Todd's first term, the School Board created magnet schools such as High School of the Arts and the language immersion schools. "Magnet schools succeeded where neighborhood schools failed because it was stable, and inner-city kids moving from place to place isn't healthy. If the home is unstable and life is unstable, the child is lost."
McGee In 1996, Mike McGee Sr. praised a firebombing of Todd's home while his wife and children were inside, and current Ald. Mike McGee Jr. said on the radio last December that Todd should be hanged for betraying the black community after he supported McGee's recall. "(McGee) is not a role model to his family, and I'm not afraid to stand up and say that. We can't let that kind of attitude shape the leadership of young black males."
Life at 30 Todd saw himself as "the role model in school, (showing people) that blacks weren't really different. At 30, I started seeing the way life was going for Leon Todd and people of my color. Things finally started looking up."
Original URL:
Leon Todd: When I was 30
[Picture available upon request]
Leon Todd Today
[Picture available upon request]
A brief philosophical and service values resume
LEON TODD
3447 N 47th Street
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
53216-3334
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
53216-3334
414-444-9490 FAX 414-444-3997
E-Mail: leontodd@execpc.com
Bio Extra!
Todd is also an outspoken critic of Ebonics, Afrocentric Curricula and multicultural education. He has receive the 'Oreo Cookie of the Year' award from angry black constituents opposing his resolutions to curtail the teaching of race specific education as a basis for self-esteem at a local school board public hearing. After another school board meeting, his home was firebombed with a molotov cocktail approximately 45 minutes after the Milwaukee school board pass a motion to set standards for ethnic
heritage (afrocentric) education and to audit the afrocentric cultural immersion schools. The motion was based on Todd's resolutions to curtail the spurious, religious and sometimes racist teaching of african centered education within the context of public education. Todd, along with other school board members, was recently pelted with raw eggs at a board meeting for his decision to support a certified and well qualified white superintendent for MPS leadership against an unqualified black candidate.
Todd is most often considered to have conservative values in regards to education, fiscal and economic standards as well as . His stands opposing afrocentric intellectual segregation curricula, favoring personal pro-life values, favoring a true love waits position for young adults, and his pro phonics stands are examples of his postions that have challenged the liberal school of thought. Todd does not believe in multiculturalism of a divided America nor does he believe in Intellectual Segregation of afrocentric curricula. He does not believe in inventive spelling or inventive composition of the current liberal direction in schooling children. Todd is socially a liberal as well as liberal in his support for the individual values of civil liberties as contained in the First 10 Amendments of the Constitution over the conservative institutions of state, government, corporations and even church hierarchy. Todd believes these institutions are necessary as long as they are transparent in their dealing and do not curb the values that whistle blowers bring to an open society.
Detailed newspaper accounts are available upon request via e-mail or simply over the internet just by Googling: Leon Todd Milwaukee. For a professional resume e-mail Leon Todd at
--------------------–
When I was 30
Leon Todd
Part of MPS' 'golden age'
By Joe Ahlers
MKE Magazine
Posted: Feb. 15, 2007
Leon Todd was ready for corporate America, but he wasn't sure corporate America was ready for Leon Todd.
Although groups like the Ford Foundation were encouraging black families to move north to work on production lines, even a young, educated black man like Todd didn't think his career would go any further than barber, funeral director, craftsman or minister.
Todd was, after all, the only black student in his middle and high school classes. When he enrolled at Northwestern Lutheran College in Watertown, school officials had to tackle an ordinance forbidding blacks from sleeping overnight in the city.
"You experienced life separately," Todd said. "The civil rights consciousness of being a second-class citizen with all the limitations blacks had - secondhand bubblers and bathrooms - it was something you just had to accommodate yourself to."
Todd accepted an offer to attend the UW-Madison business school for graduate work, unsure how his mostly-white counterparts would see him, and he was convinced no one would hire him after graduation. Success, however, eventually found its way to Todd in ways he hadn't imagined.
His first professional job came just months before he turned 30. Three years later in 1973, he ran (unsuccessfully) for the Milwaukee Public School Board. "It was like the Supreme Court. They already had their token black. Room for one, regardless of the population," Todd said.
He was elected to his first term on the board in '75, a time he calls MPS' "golden age."
"We were very progressive in our thinking about public education," he said. "(Milwaukee) was just beginning to have real racial problems, but MPS was at its peak."
Todd has experienced his share of controversy, including a firebombing of his house in the 1990s and having a politician say he should be hanged for "betraying" the black community.
Today, Todd is running again - in the Feb. 20 primary election for the School Board.
"I want to . . . return the best years of public education to Milwaukee," Todd said.
When he turned 30 Nov. 11, 1970.
Who he was then Finance project manager, Wisconsin Telephone Co.
Who he is now Age 66, retired business technology consultant. Married to Barbara with four kids: Sara, Leon Jr., Emily and Ann.
Education Todd graduated from Wisconsin Lutheran College with a degree in Latin and Greek classics, an MBA from UW-Madison and a master's in cultural foundations and education from UW-Milwaukee.
Nazis in MPS In a debate over whether MPS should start a German immersion school, a group of Nazis asked the board to separate the races. "I remember sitting at School Board meetings and hearing about how my brain weighed less than the average white brain." While some board members literally turned their backs on the Nazis, Todd listened despite whole-heartedly disagreeing. "This is a democracy . . . because of the experiences and struggles with race relations I had been through, I made the effort to listen to (all ) people."
Magnet schools During Todd's first term, the School Board created magnet schools such as High School of the Arts and the language immersion schools. "Magnet schools succeeded where neighborhood schools failed because it was stable, and inner-city kids moving from place to place isn't healthy. If the home is unstable and life is unstable, the child is lost."
McGee In 1996, Mike McGee Sr. praised a firebombing of Todd's home while his wife and children were inside, and current Ald. Mike McGee Jr. said on the radio last December that Todd should be hanged for betraying the black community after he supported McGee's recall. "(McGee) is not a role model to his family, and I'm not afraid to stand up and say that. We can't let that kind of attitude shape the leadership of young black males."
Life at 30 Todd saw himself as "the role model in school, (showing people) that blacks weren't really different. At 30, I started seeing the way life was going for Leon Todd and people of my color. Things finally started looking up."
Original URL:
Leon Todd: When I was 30
[Picture available upon request]
Leon Todd Today
[Picture available upon request]
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Educational Reforms get a failing grade: Neither the Right or Left Have a Cure?
Neither conservatives nor liberals have a cure for bad schools
Steve Chapman
Chicago Tribune
April 15, 2010
In 1990, in one of the most innovative developments in modern American education, the Milwaukee public schools created a parental choice system. Some low-income parents got vouchers that could be used to send their children to private schools.
It was a richly promising idea. The new option would let disadvantaged kids escape wretched public schools. Competition would force public schools to improve or close. Students would learn more.
Twenty years have passed. Last week, researchers at the School Choice Demonstration Project at the University of Arkansas published their latest assessment of the results.
What did they find? Something unexpected: Kids in the program do no better than everyone else. "At this point," said professor Patrick J. Wolf, "the voucher students are showing average rates of achievement gain similar to their public school peers."
This is a surprise to anyone who originally supported the voucher idea — as I did. But it's entirely consistent with the record elsewhere.
In Washington, D.C., voucher kids improved a little in reading after three years, but not in math. A 2009 review of all the studies on voucher programs found few gains, "most of which are not statistically different from zero." This type of school choice, whatever its merits, has not accomplished what it was supposed to do.
In that, it resembles just about every idea offered by liberals, conservatives or anyone else in recent decades. Coming up with solutions for public education, it turns out, is easy. Coming up with solutions that actually work — well, that's another story.
The latest trend in education reform is charter schools — independent institutions that are publicly funded but free of the usual restrictions on hiring, firing, curriculum, instruction and so on. Today, there are some 4,700 charter schools enrolling 1.4 million kids.
Like vouchers, they are supposed to stimulate improvement by expanding options, fostering a rush to quality. Like vouchers, they have fallen way short of expectations.
In some places, there is evidence that students who win lotteries that let them go to charter schools do better than students who lose out. Stanford University economist Caroline Hoxby found evidence that in New York City, charter school kids progress more rapidly than their peers in public schools.
Page 1 of 2
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0415-chapman-20100415,0,7825146.column
Education reforms get a failing grade
Neither conservatives nor liberals have a cure for bad schools
Steve Chapman
Chicago Tribune
April 15, 2010
But her study doesn't resolve why. Do the charter schools have better educational methods? Or do the kids just function better when surrounded by motivated kids (or kids with motivated parents)?
The answer is important. Better educational methods can be duplicated in other schools. But no one knows how to increase the supply of motivated families.
In any case, New York is not exactly the norm. A study last year by Stanford's Center for Research on Education Outcomes found that overall, "charter students are not faring as well" as public school pupils.
These findings may be heartening to liberals who thought the school choice movement was a snare and a delusion. But the real world has also demolished liberal notions of how to improve educational outcomes.
More money for schools? Between 1960 and 2005, per-pupil spending in the United States quadrupled, adjusting for inflation. Yet student performance on reading and math tests stayed put.
Smaller classes? As Eric Hanushek and Alfred Lindseth note in their book, "Schoolhouses, Courthouses, and Statehouses," almost three-quarters of the studies conclude that class size doesn't affect student achievement.
Anyone who still puts stock in expanded resources has to contend with the dismal experience of the Kansas City public schools, which got a huge infusion of money when a federal judge essentially took them over in 1986.
Facilities were radically upgraded, classes shrank, new programs proliferated, teachers got raises, and every school became a magnet school. But students didn't learn any more than before. The schools got everything a supporter of old-fashioned public education could have asked for, and they couldn't educate kids any better.
What should we draw from these experiences? Not that nothing works, but that few if any remedies work consistently in different places with different populations. We shouldn't expect that broad, one-size-fits-all changes imposed by the federal government — such as those offered by the Obama administration — will pay off in student performance.
From the local school district to the federal Department of Education, humility, caution and open-mindedness are in order. Because right now, the main thing we know about improving schools is that we don't know very much.
Page 2 of 2
Steve Chapman is a member of the Tribune's editorial board and blogs at chicagotribune.com/chapman
schapman@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0415-chapman-20100415,0,7825146.column?page=2
fwd: re: How Public School Innovation Succeeded In Raising Achievement or,
Why urban public education is failing today; and should have succeeded!
The high cost of high mobility [2nd article below]
The Milwaukee Community Journal [MCJ]
Vol XXI Number 29 April 29, 1998
Wisconsin's Largest African American Newspaper
Editorial Opinion
page 2
Why urban public education is failing
by Leon Todd
Why are the MPS magnet/specialty schools so popular? Why do we have a
backlog of frustrated parents from suburbs and city, even African American
parents, who can.t get their children into a specialty schools of their
choice for lack of appropriate classroom space? What does the public
know that the educators don.t about successful schools? Why do specialty
curriculum focus schools succeed no matter where they are located and
inner city neighborhood schools chronically fail, particularly for
children of color within MPS? Why won.t the board create more successful
schools?
The number one reason for success of specialty curriculum focus schools,
known as magnet schools, is stability. Stability is the single most
important factor in the success of the magnet/specialty schools. The lack
of student school stability is the single most important factor in the
failure of the neighborhood school to provide children of color with a
quality education. These failing neighborhood schools are MPS schools
which may have a 30% to 70% turnover in every classroom year after year.
They lack stability. Our cities are filled with a hoard of nomadic urban
urchins wandering from school to school as they migrate from neighborhood
to neighborhood within the 'hood. The family, neighborhoods and schools
have become dysfunctional institutions for many children, particularly for
children of color. Abraham Maslow described a hierarchy of needs for
fulfilling human potential like academic and career success. He listed
human needs in a specific ascending order: physical needs, stability
needs, group/belonging needs, achievement/self esteem needs, and self
actualization or career needs, deliberately in that order. Maslow
identified that each need must be meet sequentially in a sequential order
before a subsequent need could be satisfied. In other words, the need for
stability must be meet prior to attempting to satisfy the child's need for
achievement, recognition, and self esteem. We in public education seem to
ignore this universally recognizable principle of Abraham Maslow when
setting goals for public education. We throw huge amounts of money for
categorical aids at achievement, recognition and self esteem and ignore
the child's primary critical need for stability, security and safety.
Stability is a critical primary need, no mater where a child lives, no
matter how often they move, no matter how rich or poor they are. And
parental/school stability, parental stability defined as familiarity with
a teacher, faculty, principal and physical facilities, not proximity,
leads to greater parental school involvement.
Number two reason is focus, school curriculum focus. The magnet schools
have curriculum focus or teaching method parents, teachers and students
can center around and agree upon. A certain style of instructional
methodology, like Montessori or Waldorf, focuses parents and students on
classroom techniques for learning. From focus follows commitment. The
parents are committed to the instructional methods before and during the
school career of the child. This commitment leads to greater levels of
parental involvement. The stable consistent elementary school focus, year
after year, leads to stability for the child and higher achievement scores
for the magnet specialty school. Focus leads to purpose and an
understanding of where the child is headed academically. It's no wonder
that substantially lower dollar expenditures at the Spanish immersion
school have had little impact on the success of the specialty school when
compared to the highly transient neighborhood school. It's no wonder that
greater and greater dollar resources have little impact in reversing the
failure at North Division or South Division High Schools, chronically
failing transient neighborhood schools.
Number three reason for specialty school success is a market/demand driven
model for urban education. Since free choice and market demand have
worked so well within public education, why not continue to let the market
place decide what schools we are going to have? Let.s take a business
model approach to market demand. Why do we suggest that public education
take a communist approach to a planned school society that the public does
not want? Let.s let the backlog, the market demand, determine what kind
of schools we have. Its worked so far for one third of the kids in MPS
whose parents have chosen specialty schools and it can work for all the
district.s kids. If parents or community want to choose a neighborhood
school, then the district should build a neighborhood school for that
community group.
Let.s do more of what works in MPS, what the market demands!
=================================================================
The Maslow Hierarchy of Needs
=================================================================
Who is Abraham Maslow? -Part I Description Below
Abraham Maslow
Five Level Motivational Development
MPS Must Start With Level One Below Not With Level Four or Five
=================================================================
(Maslow Level Number 5)
School-to-Work (STW)
Self-Realization
Self-Actualization
Becoming What You're Capable of Becoming
===============================
(Maslow Level Number 4)
(Academic) Achievement (High Standards)
Recognition, Self-Esteem
Responsibility, Independence,
Respect, Appreciation, Prestige,
Attention, Importance, Ego, Identity
(Inappropriate Focus of Traditional Public Schooling)
=======================================
***************************************
(Maslow's Urban Education Family Values Gap Below Level 3 & Level 2)
To Increase Academic Achievement Above
Public Schooling Needs To Address
Family Values Level 2 & Level 3 Below
Not Level 5 STW First or Level 4 standards. It Just Won't Work
******************************************
==========================================
(Maslow Level Number 3 Family Values)
Family or Institutional (School) Identity & Integrity (School Focus)
Belonging, Family or School Orientation, Affection, Love, Approval,
Family & Group (School) Acceptance, Friendship, Caring
Nurturing -Parent & Parenting Skills Empowerment
==============================================
(Maslow Level Number 2 Family Values)
(School) Stability, Security, Safety, Structure, Order, Creed, (Marriage)
Dependency, Protection, Law, Tenure, Insurance, Pension, (Religion)
Direct Systematic Phonics, Character Based Education and Values
======================================================
******************************************************
(Maslow's Urban Education Family Values Gap Above Level 2 & Level 3)
To Increase Academic Achievement Above -Level 4
Public Schooling Needs To Address
Family Values Above At Levels 2 & Levels 3 First
Not Level 5 STW First or Level 4 standards. It Just Won't Work
***********************************************************
===========================================================
(Maslow Level Number 1 Base Motivational Needs)
Physiological Needs, Survival Needs: Hunger, Thirst, Warmth, Rest
Shelter, Clothing, Clean Air & Water, Toxin Free Environment
(lead level in city drinking water), Nutrition, (Reproduction)
(Chapter I/Title I: Free Federal Lunch Program, Social Worker Services,
etc.)
(Motto: A hungry child can't learn, Level Number 1 first.)
==================================================================
Maslow -Part I Explanation
Chart above depicts the five sequential levels of human need satisfaction
as theorized by Abraham Maslow. Most middle class individuals will
exhibit needs at the higher levels of the hierarchy, Levels 4 & 5. This
assumes that basic needs -physiological, stability-safety-security,
caring-nurturing (L1, L2, & L3) have been satisfied by the traditional
institutions of family, neighborhood or community. In most urban
situations family, neighborhood or community fail to satify the childs
basic Level 1, 2, & 3 needs. Maslow contended that a person.s higher
level needs (like achievement) can only be reached as lower order needs
continue to be satisfied. Higher order needs like achievement and self
esteem only then develop. A person can only be motivated to satisfy each
higher level need sequentially. In a society where family values of
stability, caring and nurturing do not exist for most urban poverty class
children of color within the context of family or neighborhood, especially
when poverty class is reinforced by concentrations of race, color or
ethnicity, public schooling is the only universal institution touching all
children.s lives that can provide the structure to satisfy these
protective factors of family values at Level 1, Level 2 & Level 3. To the
extent that factors or elements embodied by Maslow level one, two and
three are inoperable, missing, countermanded or thwarted in a child.s
life, risk factors will be present for a child developing risky behaviors
and risk factors will be present against a child developing positive
productive behaviors like high GPA, school attendance and positive self
confidence. To the extent that environmental factors embodied by Maslow
level one, two and three are present, protective factors will present for
a developing positive productive school behaviors at level four such as
academic achievement and self confidence.
==================================================================
We have to start with level 1, then level 2, then level 3, then level 4
achievement and high standards and finally level 5 school-to-work (stw).
Just working at the top is throwing good money after bad. We must start
with the lead poisoning level in city drinking water first and then
student school stability next, only then will academic standards and
school-to-work work effectively to raise student achievement. Look at
what student school stability did for magnet specialty and Chapter 220
student achievement and their work force skills.
by Leon Todd 414-444-9490
-----------------------------
HIGHLY MOBILE STUDENTS: EDUCATIONAL PROBLEMS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
Carol Asher
Clearinghouse on Urban Education, New York, N.Y.
While America has long been a nation "on the move," today two types of
student mobility stand out: 1) inner-city mobility, which is prompted
largely by fluctuations in the job market; and 2) intra-city mobility,
which may be caused by upward mobility, on the one hand, or poverty and
homelessness, on the other. In fact, because of high rents, poor
housing, and economic hardship, urban schools whose populations change
as much as 100 percent a year are an increasing phenomenon
(Schuler, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mobility and Achievement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Although moving once or twice during the public school years may not be
harmful, most research shows that high mobility lowers student
achievement-- particularly when the students are from low-income,
less-educated families (Sewell, 1982; Straits, 1987). Students who
attend the same school for their whole career are most likely to
graduate, whereas the most mobile of the school populations--migrant
students--has the highest rates of school failure and dropout (Lunon,
1986; B. Tobias, personal communication, June 1991).
Just as high poverty rates in a school depress achievement even for
nonpoor students, schools with high mobility rates don't succeed even
with students whose residence is stable. Schools with high dropout rates
are more likely to be situated in unstable school districts, and to be
in high-growth states (Neuman, 1987).
Of course, the depression of achievement associated with mobility may be
compounded by other related factors: poverty, limited English fluency,
poor housing, etc. For example, an analysis of student mobility found
that children living with one parent move twice as frequently as
children living with two parents, and that children in one-parent
families also had lower achievement than those in two-parent families
(Sewell, 1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Burden of Student Mobility on Schools
---------------------------------------------------------------
High student mobility puts enormous stress on schools. Services
developed for one population--for example, limited English proficient
students--may suddenly become unnecessary, as many of its users move in
the middle of the semester. Furthermore, even attempts to monitor school
performance become meaningless if the student population tested one year
has largely changed by the next. In urban schools already burdened by
bureaucracy, mobility increases record-keeping.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Effective Schools for Mobile Students
---------------------------------------------------------------
Suggestions for interventions with highly mobile students are derived
from the effective schooling research (Neuman, 1988). High expectations,
an emphasis on excellence, small classroom size, personal contact, and
opportunities for students to exhibit competence, initiative, and
responsibility are considered critical (Druin, 1986). The issue of high
expectations is especially important here, since there is evidence that
when students enter classrooms in mid- semester, teachers tend to
prejudge them unfavorably (Neuman, 1988; Sewell, 1982). Among the
suggestions for facilitating the acclimation of new students are these:
-parent education programs and handbooks that acquaint new parents
with the effects of moving on their children, and with the
-procedures and customs of the new school.
-reception committees and tour guides.
-classroom buddies for the new students.
-inservice training for teachers in schools with highly mobile
students.
New students should be watched for distress signals--aggression,
withdrawal, over talkativeness, etc.--since the experience of moving can
be similar to death and mourning for a young child (Neuman, 1988).
Most schools assume that, as with poverty, there is little or nothing
they can do about student mobility itself. However, a pilot study in
Rochester suggests that schools can lower mobility rates by sending
letters home that describe the negative effects of mobility on grades
and graduation rates and helping parents solve landlord disputes or find
new housing nearby (Schuler, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Record-Keeping
---------------------------------------------------------------
One of the biggest administrative, and therefore pedagogical, problems
with mobile students stems from lack of prompt transfer of records.
Students may be given inappropriate placement, and even held back, while
their receiving school waits three to five months for their records (
Neuman, 1988; Sewell, 1982). These record-keeping problems have been
most obvious with migrant students. However, record-keeping problems
have long occurred with many students less clearly designated as
"transient." Voluntary desegregation is well known for creating havoc
with district record-keeping (A. Wells, 1991, personal communication).
More recently, homeless students have created a new surge in record
transfers, and districts have often been financially penalized for
students who were counted absent when they were already enrolled in a
different district. Finally, although record-keeping has not been
discussed in relationship to school choice, this new form of student
mobility may create its own record-keeping nightmare--especially since
schools will have little reason on the surface to cooperate with
competing schools by providing rapid record transfers.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Models and Pilots in Student Record-Keeping
---------------------------------------------------------------
In 1968, the Migrant Student Transfer System (MSTS) was instituted as
part of Title I/Chapter 1. The MSTS is an electronically-based record
system in the U.S. and Puerto Rico, with both health and academic
information on migrant secondary students. Unfortunately, in part
because only some schools have computer terminals and so much
communication is still done by mail, the MSTS is currently
underutilized. A study in 1989 reported that only ten states kept data
for 70 percent or more of their migrant students (Villarreal, 1989).
Under a Ford Foundation grant, a paper system called a passport was
recently piloted for Puerto Rican students moving between the island and
either New York City or districts in the state of Connecticut. Like the
MSTS, the passport contains both health and academic information.
However, unlike the MSTS, passports were created to enable the students
themselves to take charge of their own academic careers. Students carry
their passports with them when they move from the island to the
mainland, or vice versa, ensuring rapid enrollment in the appropriate
class. Of course, the system requires cooperation between the school
systems, which must both advertise the existence of passports to
students and fill them out, and there have been some problems getting
both ends equally involved (E. Davila, June 1991, personal
communication).
Finally, prompted by the drive for national educational statistics of
all kinds, an electronic nationwide record transfer system for all
students is currently being piloted by the National Center for Education
Statistics and the Council of Chief State School Officers. While Florida
already has a state-wide electronic record-keeping system, and states
such as Texas, California, and Wyoming are considering such systems, the
lack of a uniform, national record- keeping system has made collecting
good school data difficult.
Although not geared directly to the needs of highly mobile students, the
proposed national system should solve the problem of rapid record
transfer. It would also increase reliability and consistency in the
interpretation of student records. Finally, because all data would be
on-line, it would decrease costs to districts of transferring records
(B. Clements, June 1991, personal communication; R. Valdivieso, June
1991, personal communication).
Two possible problems arise in the new search for a more efficient
record- keeping system for mobile and other students. The first is
student privacy: as material becomes more accessible, it may also be
more difficult to ensure confidentiality. The second is school
accountability: record-keeping that aids in making schools more
accountable to the communities they serve may not always coincide with
records that serve a national purpose. Thus, as schools join in a
national system, they will have to be careful to ensure that they are
also keeping data for their own purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------
References
---------------------------------------------------------------
Druin, G. (1986, September). Effective schooling and at-risk students:
What the research shows. Portland, OR: Northwest Educational
Laboratories.
Lunon, J.K. (1986). Migrant student record transfer system: What is it
and who uses it? ERIC Digest: CRESS. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State
University, ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
Neuman, J. (1988). What should we do about the highly mobile student? A
research brief. Mount Vernon, WA: Educational Service District 189.
Schuler, D. (1990, Fall). Effects of family mobility on student
achievement. ERS Spectrum, 8 (4), 17-24.
Sewell, C. (1982, October). The impact of pupil mobility on assessment
of achievement and its implications for program planning. Brooklyn, NY:
Community School District 17.
Straits, B.C. (1987, January). Residence migration and school progress.
Sociology of Education, 60 (1), 34-43.
Villarreal, G.C. (1989, August). Migrant education, interstate secondary
credit accrual and acceptance manual: Practical guidelines for school
personnel serving migrant secondary students. Tallahassee, FL: Florida
State Department of Education.
------------–
The high cost of high mobility
By ERIC A. HANUSHEK
Last Updated: May 4, 2002
America is a mobile society. In fact, that has been one of its strengths; the American labor market adjusts more quickly than virtually any other labor market in the world.
But mobility has its costs. Family moves, whether for new job opportunities, improved housing or adjustment to divorce, lead to frequent changes of schools. These school changes take their toll on some children.
Moreover, the negative effects of moving are not only experienced by the children who move; all students in high-mobility schools, including non-movers, tend to be affected. Teachers must continually adjust to movements in and out of their classrooms, and these adjustments detract from learning.
Also, the impact of high mobility is not evenly dispersed across the population, instead falling more heavily on disadvantaged children. Disadvantaged children - who are likely to come to school less well prepared than advantaged children - also move more frequently. These moves are unlikely to lead to any improvements in their schools.
Higher-income parents can exercise more choice to take schools into account when they move because of their ability to choose from a wider variety of housing opportunities. But restricted housing choices plus the concentration of high-mobility families leave lower-income children worse off.
Improving the education of disadvantaged children has been and should be an important policy goal. But the issue of school mobility highlights some of the facets that make policy development difficult. First, public schools should do more to take mobility into account.
The highest mobility rates occur in large central cities, where poor children are likely to go to school. But, while decrying the problems of high mobility, many large systems have not aligned curricula and programs across schools to lessen the disruption of moving. Second, many people argue that improving schooling for poor kids requires more fundamental change, such as school choice, on the grounds that individual schools can develop innovative programs and that these programs can be one of the gains of more parental options.
The two policy options are not necessarily in conflict. Improved school choice mechanisms - ones that separate school attendance from the specifics of residential location - might stabilize schooling for some low-income children. If parents could maintain the same schools for their children even if forced by other circumstances to move, the achievement of low-income students (both moving and non-moving) might improve.
It is difficult to determine, however, whether this effect is sufficient to overcome forces that tend to increase the costs of family moves. As is often the case, developing the best policy outcomes involves trade-offs and experience.
Eric A. Hanushek is a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a member of the Koret Task Force on K-12 Education.
Appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on May 5, 2002.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/may02/40613.asp
Steve Chapman
Chicago Tribune
April 15, 2010
In 1990, in one of the most innovative developments in modern American education, the Milwaukee public schools created a parental choice system. Some low-income parents got vouchers that could be used to send their children to private schools.
It was a richly promising idea. The new option would let disadvantaged kids escape wretched public schools. Competition would force public schools to improve or close. Students would learn more.
Twenty years have passed. Last week, researchers at the School Choice Demonstration Project at the University of Arkansas published their latest assessment of the results.
What did they find? Something unexpected: Kids in the program do no better than everyone else. "At this point," said professor Patrick J. Wolf, "the voucher students are showing average rates of achievement gain similar to their public school peers."
This is a surprise to anyone who originally supported the voucher idea — as I did. But it's entirely consistent with the record elsewhere.
In Washington, D.C., voucher kids improved a little in reading after three years, but not in math. A 2009 review of all the studies on voucher programs found few gains, "most of which are not statistically different from zero." This type of school choice, whatever its merits, has not accomplished what it was supposed to do.
In that, it resembles just about every idea offered by liberals, conservatives or anyone else in recent decades. Coming up with solutions for public education, it turns out, is easy. Coming up with solutions that actually work — well, that's another story.
The latest trend in education reform is charter schools — independent institutions that are publicly funded but free of the usual restrictions on hiring, firing, curriculum, instruction and so on. Today, there are some 4,700 charter schools enrolling 1.4 million kids.
Like vouchers, they are supposed to stimulate improvement by expanding options, fostering a rush to quality. Like vouchers, they have fallen way short of expectations.
In some places, there is evidence that students who win lotteries that let them go to charter schools do better than students who lose out. Stanford University economist Caroline Hoxby found evidence that in New York City, charter school kids progress more rapidly than their peers in public schools.
Page 1 of 2
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0415-chapman-20100415,0,7825146.column
Education reforms get a failing grade
Neither conservatives nor liberals have a cure for bad schools
Steve Chapman
Chicago Tribune
April 15, 2010
But her study doesn't resolve why. Do the charter schools have better educational methods? Or do the kids just function better when surrounded by motivated kids (or kids with motivated parents)?
The answer is important. Better educational methods can be duplicated in other schools. But no one knows how to increase the supply of motivated families.
In any case, New York is not exactly the norm. A study last year by Stanford's Center for Research on Education Outcomes found that overall, "charter students are not faring as well" as public school pupils.
These findings may be heartening to liberals who thought the school choice movement was a snare and a delusion. But the real world has also demolished liberal notions of how to improve educational outcomes.
More money for schools? Between 1960 and 2005, per-pupil spending in the United States quadrupled, adjusting for inflation. Yet student performance on reading and math tests stayed put.
Smaller classes? As Eric Hanushek and Alfred Lindseth note in their book, "Schoolhouses, Courthouses, and Statehouses," almost three-quarters of the studies conclude that class size doesn't affect student achievement.
Anyone who still puts stock in expanded resources has to contend with the dismal experience of the Kansas City public schools, which got a huge infusion of money when a federal judge essentially took them over in 1986.
Facilities were radically upgraded, classes shrank, new programs proliferated, teachers got raises, and every school became a magnet school. But students didn't learn any more than before. The schools got everything a supporter of old-fashioned public education could have asked for, and they couldn't educate kids any better.
What should we draw from these experiences? Not that nothing works, but that few if any remedies work consistently in different places with different populations. We shouldn't expect that broad, one-size-fits-all changes imposed by the federal government — such as those offered by the Obama administration — will pay off in student performance.
From the local school district to the federal Department of Education, humility, caution and open-mindedness are in order. Because right now, the main thing we know about improving schools is that we don't know very much.
Page 2 of 2
Steve Chapman is a member of the Tribune's editorial board and blogs at chicagotribune.com/chapman
schapman@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0415-chapman-20100415,0,7825146.column?page=2
fwd: re: How Public School Innovation Succeeded In Raising Achievement or,
Why urban public education is failing today; and should have succeeded!
The high cost of high mobility [2nd article below]
The Milwaukee Community Journal [MCJ]
Vol XXI Number 29 April 29, 1998
Wisconsin's Largest African American Newspaper
Editorial Opinion
page 2
Why urban public education is failing
by Leon Todd
Why are the MPS magnet/specialty schools so popular? Why do we have a
backlog of frustrated parents from suburbs and city, even African American
parents, who can.t get their children into a specialty schools of their
choice for lack of appropriate classroom space? What does the public
know that the educators don.t about successful schools? Why do specialty
curriculum focus schools succeed no matter where they are located and
inner city neighborhood schools chronically fail, particularly for
children of color within MPS? Why won.t the board create more successful
schools?
The number one reason for success of specialty curriculum focus schools,
known as magnet schools, is stability. Stability is the single most
important factor in the success of the magnet/specialty schools. The lack
of student school stability is the single most important factor in the
failure of the neighborhood school to provide children of color with a
quality education. These failing neighborhood schools are MPS schools
which may have a 30% to 70% turnover in every classroom year after year.
They lack stability. Our cities are filled with a hoard of nomadic urban
urchins wandering from school to school as they migrate from neighborhood
to neighborhood within the 'hood. The family, neighborhoods and schools
have become dysfunctional institutions for many children, particularly for
children of color. Abraham Maslow described a hierarchy of needs for
fulfilling human potential like academic and career success. He listed
human needs in a specific ascending order: physical needs, stability
needs, group/belonging needs, achievement/self esteem needs, and self
actualization or career needs, deliberately in that order. Maslow
identified that each need must be meet sequentially in a sequential order
before a subsequent need could be satisfied. In other words, the need for
stability must be meet prior to attempting to satisfy the child's need for
achievement, recognition, and self esteem. We in public education seem to
ignore this universally recognizable principle of Abraham Maslow when
setting goals for public education. We throw huge amounts of money for
categorical aids at achievement, recognition and self esteem and ignore
the child's primary critical need for stability, security and safety.
Stability is a critical primary need, no mater where a child lives, no
matter how often they move, no matter how rich or poor they are. And
parental/school stability, parental stability defined as familiarity with
a teacher, faculty, principal and physical facilities, not proximity,
leads to greater parental school involvement.
Number two reason is focus, school curriculum focus. The magnet schools
have curriculum focus or teaching method parents, teachers and students
can center around and agree upon. A certain style of instructional
methodology, like Montessori or Waldorf, focuses parents and students on
classroom techniques for learning. From focus follows commitment. The
parents are committed to the instructional methods before and during the
school career of the child. This commitment leads to greater levels of
parental involvement. The stable consistent elementary school focus, year
after year, leads to stability for the child and higher achievement scores
for the magnet specialty school. Focus leads to purpose and an
understanding of where the child is headed academically. It's no wonder
that substantially lower dollar expenditures at the Spanish immersion
school have had little impact on the success of the specialty school when
compared to the highly transient neighborhood school. It's no wonder that
greater and greater dollar resources have little impact in reversing the
failure at North Division or South Division High Schools, chronically
failing transient neighborhood schools.
Number three reason for specialty school success is a market/demand driven
model for urban education. Since free choice and market demand have
worked so well within public education, why not continue to let the market
place decide what schools we are going to have? Let.s take a business
model approach to market demand. Why do we suggest that public education
take a communist approach to a planned school society that the public does
not want? Let.s let the backlog, the market demand, determine what kind
of schools we have. Its worked so far for one third of the kids in MPS
whose parents have chosen specialty schools and it can work for all the
district.s kids. If parents or community want to choose a neighborhood
school, then the district should build a neighborhood school for that
community group.
Let.s do more of what works in MPS, what the market demands!
=================================================================
The Maslow Hierarchy of Needs
=================================================================
Who is Abraham Maslow? -Part I Description Below
Abraham Maslow
Five Level Motivational Development
MPS Must Start With Level One Below Not With Level Four or Five
=================================================================
(Maslow Level Number 5)
School-to-Work (STW)
Self-Realization
Self-Actualization
Becoming What You're Capable of Becoming
===============================
(Maslow Level Number 4)
(Academic) Achievement (High Standards)
Recognition, Self-Esteem
Responsibility, Independence,
Respect, Appreciation, Prestige,
Attention, Importance, Ego, Identity
(Inappropriate Focus of Traditional Public Schooling)
=======================================
***************************************
(Maslow's Urban Education Family Values Gap Below Level 3 & Level 2)
To Increase Academic Achievement Above
Public Schooling Needs To Address
Family Values Level 2 & Level 3 Below
Not Level 5 STW First or Level 4 standards. It Just Won't Work
******************************************
==========================================
(Maslow Level Number 3 Family Values)
Family or Institutional (School) Identity & Integrity (School Focus)
Belonging, Family or School Orientation, Affection, Love, Approval,
Family & Group (School) Acceptance, Friendship, Caring
Nurturing -Parent & Parenting Skills Empowerment
==============================================
(Maslow Level Number 2 Family Values)
(School) Stability, Security, Safety, Structure, Order, Creed, (Marriage)
Dependency, Protection, Law, Tenure, Insurance, Pension, (Religion)
Direct Systematic Phonics, Character Based Education and Values
======================================================
******************************************************
(Maslow's Urban Education Family Values Gap Above Level 2 & Level 3)
To Increase Academic Achievement Above -Level 4
Public Schooling Needs To Address
Family Values Above At Levels 2 & Levels 3 First
Not Level 5 STW First or Level 4 standards. It Just Won't Work
***********************************************************
===========================================================
(Maslow Level Number 1 Base Motivational Needs)
Physiological Needs, Survival Needs: Hunger, Thirst, Warmth, Rest
Shelter, Clothing, Clean Air & Water, Toxin Free Environment
(lead level in city drinking water), Nutrition, (Reproduction)
(Chapter I/Title I: Free Federal Lunch Program, Social Worker Services,
etc.)
(Motto: A hungry child can't learn, Level Number 1 first.)
==================================================================
Maslow -Part I Explanation
Chart above depicts the five sequential levels of human need satisfaction
as theorized by Abraham Maslow. Most middle class individuals will
exhibit needs at the higher levels of the hierarchy, Levels 4 & 5. This
assumes that basic needs -physiological, stability-safety-security,
caring-nurturing (L1, L2, & L3) have been satisfied by the traditional
institutions of family, neighborhood or community. In most urban
situations family, neighborhood or community fail to satify the childs
basic Level 1, 2, & 3 needs. Maslow contended that a person.s higher
level needs (like achievement) can only be reached as lower order needs
continue to be satisfied. Higher order needs like achievement and self
esteem only then develop. A person can only be motivated to satisfy each
higher level need sequentially. In a society where family values of
stability, caring and nurturing do not exist for most urban poverty class
children of color within the context of family or neighborhood, especially
when poverty class is reinforced by concentrations of race, color or
ethnicity, public schooling is the only universal institution touching all
children.s lives that can provide the structure to satisfy these
protective factors of family values at Level 1, Level 2 & Level 3. To the
extent that factors or elements embodied by Maslow level one, two and
three are inoperable, missing, countermanded or thwarted in a child.s
life, risk factors will be present for a child developing risky behaviors
and risk factors will be present against a child developing positive
productive behaviors like high GPA, school attendance and positive self
confidence. To the extent that environmental factors embodied by Maslow
level one, two and three are present, protective factors will present for
a developing positive productive school behaviors at level four such as
academic achievement and self confidence.
==================================================================
We have to start with level 1, then level 2, then level 3, then level 4
achievement and high standards and finally level 5 school-to-work (stw).
Just working at the top is throwing good money after bad. We must start
with the lead poisoning level in city drinking water first and then
student school stability next, only then will academic standards and
school-to-work work effectively to raise student achievement. Look at
what student school stability did for magnet specialty and Chapter 220
student achievement and their work force skills.
by Leon Todd 414-444-9490
-----------------------------
HIGHLY MOBILE STUDENTS: EDUCATIONAL PROBLEMS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
Carol Asher
Clearinghouse on Urban Education, New York, N.Y.
While America has long been a nation "on the move," today two types of
student mobility stand out: 1) inner-city mobility, which is prompted
largely by fluctuations in the job market; and 2) intra-city mobility,
which may be caused by upward mobility, on the one hand, or poverty and
homelessness, on the other. In fact, because of high rents, poor
housing, and economic hardship, urban schools whose populations change
as much as 100 percent a year are an increasing phenomenon
(Schuler, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mobility and Achievement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Although moving once or twice during the public school years may not be
harmful, most research shows that high mobility lowers student
achievement-- particularly when the students are from low-income,
less-educated families (Sewell, 1982; Straits, 1987). Students who
attend the same school for their whole career are most likely to
graduate, whereas the most mobile of the school populations--migrant
students--has the highest rates of school failure and dropout (Lunon,
1986; B. Tobias, personal communication, June 1991).
Just as high poverty rates in a school depress achievement even for
nonpoor students, schools with high mobility rates don't succeed even
with students whose residence is stable. Schools with high dropout rates
are more likely to be situated in unstable school districts, and to be
in high-growth states (Neuman, 1987).
Of course, the depression of achievement associated with mobility may be
compounded by other related factors: poverty, limited English fluency,
poor housing, etc. For example, an analysis of student mobility found
that children living with one parent move twice as frequently as
children living with two parents, and that children in one-parent
families also had lower achievement than those in two-parent families
(Sewell, 1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Burden of Student Mobility on Schools
---------------------------------------------------------------
High student mobility puts enormous stress on schools. Services
developed for one population--for example, limited English proficient
students--may suddenly become unnecessary, as many of its users move in
the middle of the semester. Furthermore, even attempts to monitor school
performance become meaningless if the student population tested one year
has largely changed by the next. In urban schools already burdened by
bureaucracy, mobility increases record-keeping.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Effective Schools for Mobile Students
---------------------------------------------------------------
Suggestions for interventions with highly mobile students are derived
from the effective schooling research (Neuman, 1988). High expectations,
an emphasis on excellence, small classroom size, personal contact, and
opportunities for students to exhibit competence, initiative, and
responsibility are considered critical (Druin, 1986). The issue of high
expectations is especially important here, since there is evidence that
when students enter classrooms in mid- semester, teachers tend to
prejudge them unfavorably (Neuman, 1988; Sewell, 1982). Among the
suggestions for facilitating the acclimation of new students are these:
-parent education programs and handbooks that acquaint new parents
with the effects of moving on their children, and with the
-procedures and customs of the new school.
-reception committees and tour guides.
-classroom buddies for the new students.
-inservice training for teachers in schools with highly mobile
students.
New students should be watched for distress signals--aggression,
withdrawal, over talkativeness, etc.--since the experience of moving can
be similar to death and mourning for a young child (Neuman, 1988).
Most schools assume that, as with poverty, there is little or nothing
they can do about student mobility itself. However, a pilot study in
Rochester suggests that schools can lower mobility rates by sending
letters home that describe the negative effects of mobility on grades
and graduation rates and helping parents solve landlord disputes or find
new housing nearby (Schuler, 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Record-Keeping
---------------------------------------------------------------
One of the biggest administrative, and therefore pedagogical, problems
with mobile students stems from lack of prompt transfer of records.
Students may be given inappropriate placement, and even held back, while
their receiving school waits three to five months for their records (
Neuman, 1988; Sewell, 1982). These record-keeping problems have been
most obvious with migrant students. However, record-keeping problems
have long occurred with many students less clearly designated as
"transient." Voluntary desegregation is well known for creating havoc
with district record-keeping (A. Wells, 1991, personal communication).
More recently, homeless students have created a new surge in record
transfers, and districts have often been financially penalized for
students who were counted absent when they were already enrolled in a
different district. Finally, although record-keeping has not been
discussed in relationship to school choice, this new form of student
mobility may create its own record-keeping nightmare--especially since
schools will have little reason on the surface to cooperate with
competing schools by providing rapid record transfers.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Models and Pilots in Student Record-Keeping
---------------------------------------------------------------
In 1968, the Migrant Student Transfer System (MSTS) was instituted as
part of Title I/Chapter 1. The MSTS is an electronically-based record
system in the U.S. and Puerto Rico, with both health and academic
information on migrant secondary students. Unfortunately, in part
because only some schools have computer terminals and so much
communication is still done by mail, the MSTS is currently
underutilized. A study in 1989 reported that only ten states kept data
for 70 percent or more of their migrant students (Villarreal, 1989).
Under a Ford Foundation grant, a paper system called a passport was
recently piloted for Puerto Rican students moving between the island and
either New York City or districts in the state of Connecticut. Like the
MSTS, the passport contains both health and academic information.
However, unlike the MSTS, passports were created to enable the students
themselves to take charge of their own academic careers. Students carry
their passports with them when they move from the island to the
mainland, or vice versa, ensuring rapid enrollment in the appropriate
class. Of course, the system requires cooperation between the school
systems, which must both advertise the existence of passports to
students and fill them out, and there have been some problems getting
both ends equally involved (E. Davila, June 1991, personal
communication).
Finally, prompted by the drive for national educational statistics of
all kinds, an electronic nationwide record transfer system for all
students is currently being piloted by the National Center for Education
Statistics and the Council of Chief State School Officers. While Florida
already has a state-wide electronic record-keeping system, and states
such as Texas, California, and Wyoming are considering such systems, the
lack of a uniform, national record- keeping system has made collecting
good school data difficult.
Although not geared directly to the needs of highly mobile students, the
proposed national system should solve the problem of rapid record
transfer. It would also increase reliability and consistency in the
interpretation of student records. Finally, because all data would be
on-line, it would decrease costs to districts of transferring records
(B. Clements, June 1991, personal communication; R. Valdivieso, June
1991, personal communication).
Two possible problems arise in the new search for a more efficient
record- keeping system for mobile and other students. The first is
student privacy: as material becomes more accessible, it may also be
more difficult to ensure confidentiality. The second is school
accountability: record-keeping that aids in making schools more
accountable to the communities they serve may not always coincide with
records that serve a national purpose. Thus, as schools join in a
national system, they will have to be careful to ensure that they are
also keeping data for their own purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------
References
---------------------------------------------------------------
Druin, G. (1986, September). Effective schooling and at-risk students:
What the research shows. Portland, OR: Northwest Educational
Laboratories.
Lunon, J.K. (1986). Migrant student record transfer system: What is it
and who uses it? ERIC Digest: CRESS. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State
University, ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
Neuman, J. (1988). What should we do about the highly mobile student? A
research brief. Mount Vernon, WA: Educational Service District 189.
Schuler, D. (1990, Fall). Effects of family mobility on student
achievement. ERS Spectrum, 8 (4), 17-24.
Sewell, C. (1982, October). The impact of pupil mobility on assessment
of achievement and its implications for program planning. Brooklyn, NY:
Community School District 17.
Straits, B.C. (1987, January). Residence migration and school progress.
Sociology of Education, 60 (1), 34-43.
Villarreal, G.C. (1989, August). Migrant education, interstate secondary
credit accrual and acceptance manual: Practical guidelines for school
personnel serving migrant secondary students. Tallahassee, FL: Florida
State Department of Education.
------------–
The high cost of high mobility
By ERIC A. HANUSHEK
Last Updated: May 4, 2002
America is a mobile society. In fact, that has been one of its strengths; the American labor market adjusts more quickly than virtually any other labor market in the world.
But mobility has its costs. Family moves, whether for new job opportunities, improved housing or adjustment to divorce, lead to frequent changes of schools. These school changes take their toll on some children.
Moreover, the negative effects of moving are not only experienced by the children who move; all students in high-mobility schools, including non-movers, tend to be affected. Teachers must continually adjust to movements in and out of their classrooms, and these adjustments detract from learning.
Also, the impact of high mobility is not evenly dispersed across the population, instead falling more heavily on disadvantaged children. Disadvantaged children - who are likely to come to school less well prepared than advantaged children - also move more frequently. These moves are unlikely to lead to any improvements in their schools.
Higher-income parents can exercise more choice to take schools into account when they move because of their ability to choose from a wider variety of housing opportunities. But restricted housing choices plus the concentration of high-mobility families leave lower-income children worse off.
Improving the education of disadvantaged children has been and should be an important policy goal. But the issue of school mobility highlights some of the facets that make policy development difficult. First, public schools should do more to take mobility into account.
The highest mobility rates occur in large central cities, where poor children are likely to go to school. But, while decrying the problems of high mobility, many large systems have not aligned curricula and programs across schools to lessen the disruption of moving. Second, many people argue that improving schooling for poor kids requires more fundamental change, such as school choice, on the grounds that individual schools can develop innovative programs and that these programs can be one of the gains of more parental options.
The two policy options are not necessarily in conflict. Improved school choice mechanisms - ones that separate school attendance from the specifics of residential location - might stabilize schooling for some low-income children. If parents could maintain the same schools for their children even if forced by other circumstances to move, the achievement of low-income students (both moving and non-moving) might improve.
It is difficult to determine, however, whether this effect is sufficient to overcome forces that tend to increase the costs of family moves. As is often the case, developing the best policy outcomes involves trade-offs and experience.
Eric A. Hanushek is a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a member of the Koret Task Force on K-12 Education.
Appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on May 5, 2002.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/may02/40613.asp
Friday, December 3, 2010
Chapter 220 MILWAUKEE INTER DISTRICT PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE AND ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY #3
-Continuation- -Continuation- -Continuation- -Continuation-
Part #3
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL by:
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
Web site:
E-mail:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, (1985)
Under the Supervision of
Dr. Harold M. Rose
page 104
Assistance Program and Emergency School Act to aid desegregation efforts were used to implement a variety of programs including in-service programs for professional and non-professional staff, community relations programs, curriculum development, research and evaluation, and Latino student needs programs.5 These programs were not in operation prior to desegregation and would have been difficult if not impossible to establish without these funds. In Boston, Massachusetts, colleges, universities, and businesses assisted public schools as part of the desegregation effort. New programs of instruction were implemented and existing ones were strengthened. Brandeis Uhiversity worked with the citywide magnet English High School and Harvard professors worked with the staff and students of Roxbury High School. It seemed that in many districts, educational quality improved as a result of desegregation.
A second observation pertained to social class, but not in the same context as in this research. Several of the studies examined the relationship between social class and acceptance of interracial schooling. Middle and upper class whites seemed to hold more liberal attitudes towards desegregation than did lower class whites. It seemed logical that if upper and middle class whites had what could be considered a "healthy" attitude towards interracial contact in the schools, their general attitudes were most likely conducive to other forms of social and individual progress. On the other hand, the rejection of the idea of interracial schooling by many lower class whites was
c_
undoubtedly a reflection of their general attitudes concerning race relations. The manner in which the general attitudes of various social classes were reflected in interracial schooling situations seemed worth investigating.
Community response to desegregation efforts was an important factor in the success or failure of interracial schooling. As was the case in Boston, Massachusetts, reactions to desegregation were often negative if not violent. The thought occurred that if black children attended schools with white students whose parents had a liberal attitude towards racial interaction, black and white students would be more likely to derive cultural and academic benefits from the experience. Voluntary city/suburban transfer programs, including Project Concern in Hartford, Connecticut, and METoO were examined in an attempt to determine whether community response was less hostile when interracial schooling was voluntarily achieved.
It became obvious that if equality in educational opportunity was to become more than just a topic of conversation engaged in by propo-nents of a liberal ideology, the relationships between interracial schooling, school social class, socioeconomic status, and family cul-ture should be examined.
The Chapter 220 program, which began in the 1976-1977 school year, provided an excellent opportunity to examine these and related relation-ships in upper and middle class majority white suburban schools.
.
104
Assistance Program and Emergency School Act to aid desegregation ef-forts were used to implement a variety of programs including in-service programs for professional and non-professional staff, community rela-tions programs, curriculum development, research and evaluation, and Latino student needs programs.5 These programs were not in operation prior to desegregation and would have been difficult if not impossible to establish without these funds. In Boston, Massachusetts, colleges, universities, and businesses assisted public schools as part of the desegregation effort. New programs of instruction were implemented and existing ones were strengthened. Brandeis Uhiversity worked with the citywide magnet English High School and Harvard professors worked with the staff and students of Roxbury High School. It seemed that in many districts, educational quality improved as a result of de-segregation.
A second observation pertained to social class, but not in the same context as in this research. Several of the studies examined the relationship between social class and acceptance of interracial school-ing. Middle and upper class whites seemed to hold more liberal atti-tudes towards desegregation than did lower class whites. It seemed logical that if upper and middle class whites had what could be con-sidered a "healthy" attitude towards interracial contact in the schools, their general attitudes were most likely conducive to other forms of social and individual progress. On the other hand, the rejection of the idea of interracial schooling by many lower class whites was
106
METROPOLITAN DESEGREGATION
1
It is rare for investigations of social phenomena to take place in a social, political, or economic vacuum. The phenomena or situa-tions sought to be explained must be evaluated in their proper context. This holds true for the present investigation.
The possibility of implementing ametropolitan desegregation plan has been considered in Milwaukee for over 10 years. The Conta Plan, which was discussed in Chapter II, was the first attempt to secure sup-port for a metropolitan approach to desegregation in the state of Wis-consin.7 In flay of 1975, the City Attorney supported a metropolitan solution to desegregation.8 Other individuals and organizations supported metropolitan desegregation as well. In November 1975, the Coalition for Quality Education held a conference to explore metropolitan alternatives to integration. On November 23, 1975, then State Representative Lloyd Barbee introduced Assembly Bill 1248 (AB 1248) which would require each school district in the state to develop a plan to 'prevent, eliminate or reduce excessive racial imbalance."9 In 1979, Judge Reynolds stated that "for the purpose of achieving the most effective remedy ... it would certainly make sense to include metropolitan Milwaukee school districts within the remedy for the City of Milwaukee public school
system. tt10
On August 31, 1982, the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee proposed a study of alternate educational solutions that would provide the maximum instructional and financial resources while
107
ensuring a multi-cultural educational setting for every child. The Board authorized the Administration to engage legal counsel to consider the merits of the Board's possible participation in litigation to in-tegrate housing and public education in the Milwaukee metropolitan area.ll
On October 26, 1983, the Superintendent of Schools informed the
Board that based on the evidence gathered, there is reason to believe
that a suit could be successfully pursued and that if such a suit were
pursued, the Board should take the initiative because serving the best
interests of Milwaukee's school children is the Board's responsibility.
The Superintendent recommended that:
(1) the Board adopt a proposal to increase metropolitan school inte-
gration and authorize the President to formally submit the proposal
on behalf of the Board to the designated area school boards for their
consideration and action, such action to occur on or before December
15, 1983;
(2) the Board adopt a statement endorsing the concept of an inte-
grated metropolitan school system;
(3) the Board adopt a resolution which was drafted by attorneys at
the request of the Board and which authorizes them to prepare the
necessary documents to initiate litigation to integrate public edu-
cation in the metropolitan area.l2
"A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration," states that while the Board has faithfully attempted to implement its desegregation plan since 1976, there are still public schools in
108
Milwaukee with a black student population of over 80% and that demographic projections indicate that racial isolation of Milwaukee students may very well increase.
As we enter the final year of the desegregation plan, the Mil-waukee Board remains committed to the achievement of complete and stable school desegregation. It is clear, however, that further desegregation progress requires the increased involvement of suburban school districts throughout the metropolitan area.l3
The Board contended that the creation of a metropolitan school system is the most efficient and effective means of achieving full desegregation and equal opportunity. Consolidating area school dis-tricts into one or more school districts serving both the city and suburbs, the Board argued, would not only result in increased racial balance, but also substantial savings to the metropolotian taxpayers. The Milwaukee Board also stated that it would be willing to join with the suburban school districts in an effort to voluntarily increase the level of inter-district exchange through the existing Chapter 220 program. It was made clear that should suburban districts reject what the Board considered a modest proposal, other units of govern-ment, and if necessary, the federal courts, would be approached in order to seek redress for discriminatory action in education and housing in order to fulfill its obligation to the students and citi-zens of Milwauke..
In October of 1983, the Milwaukee Board of School Directors
109
contacted the school board presidents of 24 suburban districts re-
questing their assistance in providing a quality education for both
black and white students in the metropolitan area.
TABLE 3.1
SDEt£R~AN DISTRICTS CONTACTED BY THE MILWAUKEE SCHOOL BOARD
Brown Deer
Cudahy
Elmbrook
Fox Point/Bayside
Franklin
Germantown
Glendale
Greendale
Greenfield
Hamilton-Sussex
Menomonee Falls
Mequon/Thiensville
Mus ke go /Norway
New Berlin
Nicolet
Oak Creek/Franklin
St. Francis
Shorewood
South Milwaukee
Waukesha
Wanwatosa
West Allis/West Milwaukee
Whitefish Bay
Whitnall/Hales Corners
While the Board did not suggest a specific plan for the accomplish-
ment of this goal, its position on metropolitan desegregation was clearly
set forth:
The Milwaukee Board of School Directors believes it is in the long-tenm best interests of the metropolitan area that we have a metropolitan school system. Our interest in ad-vocating this arrangement is engendered not only by our commitment to metropolitan integration, but also because of our belief that a metropolitan school system could serve all area citizens more effectively and efficiently. We believe that higher quality programs and greater tax effi-ciencies can be realized without loss of cherished local control. As individuals have an opportunity to fairly assess the advantages of a metropolitan school system, we believe that they will conclude, a,4we have concluded, that such a system should be adopted.
The Board concurred with the conclusions of the Task Force on Educa-
tion of the Goals Greater Milwaukee/2000 project that the "Chapter 220 program appears to have reached a plateau,''l5 and that new
110
initiatives are necessary to ensure equal access to educational op-portunities for all students in the metropolitan area. The Board acknowledged that the voluntary student exchange program between the Milwaukee Public Schools and suburban districts within Milwaukee County has resulted in positive individual and social benefits, but only to a limited degree because of the small number of students involved. From 1978-1979 to 1981-1982, black enrollment in suburban districts in Milwaukee County has only increased from 2.2 percent to 3 percent. Minority enrollment in suburban schools would have been only 1.1 per-cent had there been no Chapter 220 program.
While interest in the suggestions of suburban administrators and staff for improving the proposal was expressed, the Board firmly stated that there can be no misunderstanding about its attitude to-wards the proposal. The proposal "represents the most modest, accept-able goal and timeline for increasing metropolitan integration. Any response to this proposal that suggests fewer students involved in an exchange program, or a longer ti~meline for implementation, would be viewed as diminishing the proposal, not strengthening it.''l6 The Board further stated that it recognized that the suburban districts would require time to study the proposal and go through the necessary in-volvement processes to determine their responses. The decisions of the suburban districts were requested by December 15, 1983.
The suburban districts were informed that several law firms had been retained and that attorneys had concluded that a metro-
111
politan law suit could be successfully pursued.
On February 3, 1984, "The Suburban/Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Positive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities for Milwaukee and Suburban Students" was drafted and subsequently submitted to the Milwaukee Board of School Directors. Upon consideration of the October 31, 1983 proposal sent to the suburban districts and the suburbs' responses, on May 11, 1984, the Board submitted a proposal to the suburbs outlining the overall goals to be achieved, conditions of the agreement, and a recommended timetable for implementation. The goals were: (1) to achieve a high level of quality educational programs for students in the Milwaukee area. (2) to avoid resegregation of the Milwaukee Public Schools and to maintain a racial balance in the city school district of 45% black, 45% white, and 10% others. By the fall of 1985, this goal will be 50% accomplished and fully accomplished by the fall of 1986. (3) to provide equal nondiscriminatory access to schools in the Milwaukee area to minority students and staff. (4) to increase the achievement of all students and to narrow the gap between the average achievement of minority and majority students as measured by standardized tests, number and percent graduating from high school, number and percent going on to institutions of higher learning, and the number and percent of students receiving full-time employment for which they have been specifically trained.
112
(5) to adhere to the principle of equality in establishing specific
goals between the participating suburban districts and the Milwaukee
Public Schools.
(6) to enhance the integration of the schools and the total community
through a comprehensive human relations program.
(7) to increase minority staff representation in the suburbs and to
increase affirmative employment of minorities in the Milwaukee Public
Schools.
(8) to receive support from the State of Wisconsin which will provide
the financial resources and the facilitating legislation.l7
The following conditions were set forth by the Board:
1. Agreements shall be made between the Milwaukee Public Schools and those school districts contiguous to the City-of Milwaukee and County.
2. Voluntary means shall be used to achieve the goals, but the timetable and goals of the plan must be met by the participating districts over the next three school years.
3. The present Chapter 220 proce & res which provide for individual planning councils will be utilized to establish contractual agreements between participating suburban school districts and the Milwaukee Public Schools.
4. The planning and implementation process will be enhanced by the development of a representative congress of parents and teachers from each participating school district with proportional representatives from the Milwaukee Public Schools. The racial makeup of the Milwaukee Public Schools' delegates to the congress will be re-presentative of the student population.
5. In order to coordinate the activities among the school districts an Interdistrict Coordinating Committee shall be formed consisting of the Superintendents, the Board Presidents, and a proportional number of representatives from the congress, with adequate representation of minorities.
113
6. A monitoring and evaluation process shall be put into effect by the representative congress as one of its functions.
7. The representative congress of parents and teachers would encourage suburban transfer students to transfer to schools in the Milwaukee school system other than just specialty schools.l8
On May 31, 1984, a revised version of "The Suburban/Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Positive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities for Milwaukee and Suburban Students" was drafted. The revised version, like the original, made no mention of the creation of a metropolitan school district. The sub-urbs continued to support voluntary participation in the plan and working through the existing Chapter 220 program.
Annual goal setting and evaluation will be done through each school district's Chapter 220 planning councils with approval of the board of education. Each board of education will adopt its own set of percentage or numerical goals for volun-tary suburban and city transfers of students. Each school district will then invidivually work toward the achievement of its goal. Planning councils will also serve as a means to explore and develop other methods of increasing voluntary participation in the Chapter 220 program. At no time will a student ever be assigned to attend school in another school district in an effort to meet the voluntary goals of a dis-trict planning council.l9
On May 11, 1984, Milwaukee school superintendent McMurrin con-tacted the suburban districts in regard to their response to the Mil-waukee Board's proposal for increasing inter-district integration. Between May 29 and June 19, twenty-four suburban districts wrote letters to the Milwaukee School Board. The Nicolet High School Dis-trict, the third district to respond, did so on June 6, 1984. Brown
114
Deer responded on June 7. Twelve of the 24 districts, including Brown Deer, supported the revised version of the suburban/Milwaukee Plan for cooperation etween school districts. Nicolet did not sup-port the plan. Twelve districts, including Brown Deer and Nicolet, indicated a willingness to work with M.P.S. when M.P.S. approved their suburban/Milwaukee plan. Brown Deer, Nicolet, and ten other districts wanted voluntary participation only. Both Nicolet and Brown Deer stated that they lacked the legal authority to compel nonvoluntary transfers. Nicolet expressed a desire to work through the existing Chapter 220 program.
On June 28, 1984, the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee filed suit with the United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin. The state and regional defendants named in the complaint were: (1) the State of Wisconsin, (2) Anthony S. Earl in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Wisconsin, (3) Herbert S. Grover in his official capacity as State Superintendent of the Department of Public Instruction, (4) the Agency School Com-mittee of the Cooperative Educational Service Agency (CESA) 19, (5) Virginia Stolhand in her official capacity as president of the Agency School Commuttee (ASC) of CESA 19, (6) CESA 19, (7) William D. Bergum in his official capacity as executive administrator of CESA 19, and (8) Paule Kolff in her official capacity as chairperson of the CESA 19 Board of Control. These defendants have ultimate respon-sibility for public education in Wisconsin which includes insuring that federal and State laws requiring nondiscrimination in public
education are upheld, providing financial support to local school districts, and conducting and supervising school district reorgani-zation and other interdistrict activities in the Milwaukee area.20
The school districts listed in Table 3.1 were named as sub-urban defendants.
The Board requested declaratory and injunctive relief to redress the deprivation under color of state law of the rights, priviliges, and immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of Wisconsin to the plaintiff and the school-children of Milwaukee. It sought to remedy the illegal racial segre-gation and the resulting inequality in educational opportunity and the metropolitan-wide racially dual structure of education created and maintained by defendants in the Milwaukee metropolitan area.21
The complaint alleged that the defendants and their predecessors have cooperated in a continuing series of actions and refusals to act with respect to education and housing which has intentionally and ef-fectively isolated Milwaukee area black students within the city of Milwaukee.22 Actions by defendants included excluding Milwaukee from, and otherwise impeding, interdistrict school reorganization efforts; refusing to permit significant numbers of black students from the city to attend suburban schools despite the availability of financial subsidies and the excess capacity of suburban schools; vio-lating specific affirmative obligations under state law to undertake
116
reorganization to promote equal educational opportunity and rejecting proposals which would have such a desegregation effect; and rein-forcing governmental action promoting residential segregation which has contributed to the creation and maintenance of segregated schools.
The Board further alleged that from 1947 to 1965, defendants and their predecessors intentionally excluded Milwaukee from interdistrict school reorganization activities undertaken under the auspices of County School Committees in Wisconsin. The rejection of a 1950 re-organization plan recommended by the Milwaukee County School Committee which would have consolidated the 67 school districts then existing in Milwaukee County into 7 districts, involved significant consolida-tion between Milwaukee and surrounding areas, and increased integration, was cited as evidence against the defendants. During the 1950's and 1960's, a pattern of school district reorganization took place which excluded and produced the fragmented structure of 18 school districts that presently exist in Milwaukee County. As a result of this and other actions by the defendants, Milwaukee has become a separate, heavily black district while the suburbs are overwhelmingly white. The effects of the defendants' actions were foreseeable, argued the Board, and both helped create and reinforce segregated conditions in
the Milwaukee area.
The suburban school
districts were also cited for engaging in discriminatory practices. One of these practices pertains to the Chapter 220 program. The Board argued that the suburban defendants.
23
117
despite excess capacity in suburban schools and the availability of financial subsidies, have severely limited participation in Chapter 220 in a number of ways. Among them are: (1) prohibiting black students from attending suburban schools, (2) imposing arbitrary quotas on the number of black students allowed to participate in the program, (3) prohibiting black students from Milwaukee from attending regular programs and confining them to summer or special programs, and (4) refusing to take effective steps to encourage suburban white student participation in the program. The complaint also stated that the maintenance of racially identifiable schools and discrimination in faculty and administrative hiring by the suburban school district defendants has intentionally reinforced and perpetuated the segregated conditions throughout the Milwaukee area.24
Concerning the issue of discrimination in fair housing practices, the Board alleged that Milwaukee area government agencies created by the State of Wisconsin have engaged in segregative subsidized housing practices with the effect and purpose of restricting blacks to segre-gated areas within the City of Milwaukee, thereby contributing to and reinforcing school segregation. It was further stated that the federally-assisted Section 8 rent assistance program has been operated in a racially discriminatory manner. Black Milwaukee residents who ob-tain rent assistance subsidy certificates in the city are precluded from using them outside of city boundaries. Even though black Mil-waukee residents can theoretically obtain certificates from the
118
Milwaukee County Section 8 program, rent subsidies outside the city have been granted almost exclusively to whites.25
The legal and political battles over the issue of metropolitan desegregation in the Milwaukee area have not ended. The NAACP and other organizations are considering intervening in the legal action as plaintiffs.
BROWN DEER
The present investigation began in the late fall of 1980. Sev-eral factors, including the number of Chapter 220 students attending schools in each of the participating school districts, the size of the resident black student populations in each district, and median income levels of families in given suburbs, were taken into consideration in selecting the suburban district in which the study was to take place.
The Brown Deer School District was selected. Brown Deer, a sub-urb located north of the city of Milwaukee, had a total population of 12,921 in 1980, of which about 741 or 5.7' was black. The median family income was $28,957. Nearly 2,856 students were enrolled in district schools. Approximately 103 of the district's students were black. About half of black students attended under the Chapter 220 program.
Between February and April of 1981, a number of telephone con-versations were held with Brown Deer officials regarding the possi-bility of conducting research on factors related to the academic
119
performance of black students attending district schools. In April of
1981, a research proposal was sent to the district for review. A
number of conversations with school officials and the Director of
the research committee followed. Concern was expressed about several aspects of the proposed project. The costs of the study, both in terms of money and staff time, was one concern. School personnel would be unable to
provide assistance during regular working hours.
They would have to be compensated for working addition, I- ~agreed to do so. Another ic=.~^ a- -
.~..~ "ualllonal Hours if they
confidentialit o
y f respondents. In June of 1981, a letter from the director of the research committee stating that the proposal would be circulated among committee members prior to their first fall meeting to be held on or about September 23, 1981, was received. A copy of
the survey instrument was requested.
During the summer of 1981, the thought occurred that nearly a
year had been spent preparing to conduct the study in Brown Deer, but there was still no indication that the research request would be
granted. The Superintendent showed interest in the project, but the fact that it was taking so long to obtain permission to conduct the
study prompted serious questioning of whether permission would be granted under any circumstances. Still, the desire to conduct the
study persisted.
Intent on pursuing the subject. the interracial schooling issue were contacted.
several persons knowledgable of
These sources
indicated that the ream_ ~^ --
120
- ..- Per zzu program would possibly by discontinued
in Brown Deer. A variety of reasons was given for the possible dis-continuation. Among them were the following: the school district saw no need to accept black students from Milwaukee to further integration since the black population in Brown Deer was increasing at a rapid rate; disciplinary problems had increased since the program began; too many supplementary educational programs were necessary in order to meet the needs of Chapter 220 students; and the program simply was not work-ing due to differences in the backgrounds and academic preparation be-tween 220 and resident students. The stated reasons did not seem as important as the fact that if the program was to be discontinued, the research would be obsolete in terms of benefit to the school system and policy implications before it was completed.
Prior to the scheduled September research committee meeting, the Director of the research committee was contacted and asked that the proposal not be considered. In October of 1981, the research committee director sent a letter stating that as requested, no action was taken on the proposal at the research committee meeting held October 6, 1981. There was no further contact with Brown Deer school officials.
NICOLET
Determined to conduct a study of black achievment in a suburban interracial school, the Shorewood and Nicolet school districts were considered as possible alternative settings. Since conducting this type of research necessitates numerous trips to the district under in-vestigation, Shorewood would have been favored on the basis of its
121 proximity to the YAM campus. Another advantage that might have ac-crued from the selection of Shorewood is the fact that the district had been involved, although on a very small scale, with promoting racial and cultural exchange for a number of years.26 Despite these advantages, the Nicolet District was ultimately selected.
The Nicolet High School District was selected for several reasons. Palay's (1978) report suggested that Nicolet had been supportive of the Chapter 220 program from the very beginning. The district in-creased the number of 220 students each year and employed a guidance counselor who, in addition to other duties, was responsible for the social support, selection, and retention of Chapter 220 students. This "multi-ethnic" counselor organized a variety of activities designed to increase white students' and faculty's understanding of black culture, promote better race relations between black and white students, and increase black students' knowledge and understanding of their history and culture. In February of 1982, she organized a Black History Month program which emphasized the contributions of blacks in various areas, including music, dance, and literature. White students, faculty, and parents were encouraged to attend. A noted black writer, David Bradley, author of The Chaneysville Incident among other works, spoke at the school at her invitation. Another reason for the selection of the Nicolet district was that a study involving all schools within a given suburban district would probably have been too large an undertaking given the time it would have taken to conduct such a stay, and having
s
122
to deal with the problems of monetary constraints. The fact that the Nicolet High School district is an independent school district made the research effort more managable. The high academic standards of the school made it an ideal setting for an investigation of the factors related to academic achievement. Nearly 80! of Nicolet's 1981 graduating class enrolled in four-year colleges. The mean cumulative SPA of Nicolet students in 1981 was 3.60 on a 5.0 scale. Finally, a study of achievement at Nicolet provides an opportunity to look at sub-urban diversification in terms of status differentials.
Students from the suburbs of Bayside, Glendale, Fox Point, and River Hills, comprise the resident population of Nicolet. Of these four suburbs, three are in the top ten in the state in median family income. River Hills and Bayside rank first and third, respectively. Even though Glendale does not rank as high as the other three suburbs, Glendale's median family income is significantly higher than that of the city of Milwaukee.
On October 3rd, Nicolet's then "multi-ethnic" counselor was con-tacted in regard to conducting a study of black student achievement at Nicolet. Prepared for the possible obstacles to be encountered m school system research and having attempted to address the types of concerns expressed by Brown Deer, the nature and purpose of the pro-posed study was disucssed. It was suggested that the Director of Pupil Services be contacted. On October 5, 1981, he was contacted. After a discussion of the possible merits of such a study, interest in
-
TABLE 3.2
ECONOMIC AND RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BAYSIDE, GLENDALE,
FOX POINT, RIVER HILLS, AND MILWAUKEE
Total
Popula- Whites Blacks % Black
tion
Bayside 4,612 4,460 102
Glendale 13,882 13,142 462
Fox Point 7,649 7,505
River Hills 1,642
Milwaukee 636,212
1, SSS
466,620
2.21
3.34
71 .93
34 2.07
146,940 23.09
Median % Below
family poverty
income level
$45,884 1.4%
31,111 2.6%
40,635 2.0'
55,277 2.71
19.783 13.81
School population
3 years old and
over
_ _
1,108
2,856
2,511
1,515
122,714
124
the project was expressed. On October 12, the Director of Pupil Ser-vices and the then "multi-ethnic" counselor were sent copies of the proposal.
After review of the proposal, the pupil services director stated that while the project sounded very interesting, the request to con-duct the research would be denied. It seemed that the Brown Deer experience was to reoccur. A few days later, he was contacted again and asked why the investigation could not be conducted. The potential educational value of the research was again discussed. It was then stated that if white as well as black student achievement was investi-gated, the request would be reconsidered. Upon agreement to this con-dition and after a favorable review of the questionnaire, permission to conduct the study was granted. The process of obtaining permission to conduct the study took approximately four months. however, was weel worth the wait.
DATA COLLECTION
The time required,
Nicolet provided students' grade point averages, year in school, sex, and previous school attended. Additionally, the school provided general background information describing the curriculum, the student body, and its involvement in Chapter 220, including the percentage of Nicolet graduates who had attended college prior to the 1981-1982 school year, mean grade point averages, course descriptions, and an explanation of their grading system. IQ and standardized test scores were also requested, but the school could not provide them. A questionnaire was designed in order to secure a data base that would permit the testing
of the hypothesized relationships between SES, family culture, and achievement. In addition to socioeconomic status and family culture measures, the questionnaire contained items pertaining to student in-volvement in extracurricular activities, residence, and incidence of
reprimand.
A random sample of white students stratified by sex and year in school was generated on Nicolet's in-house computer. The sample of white students consisted of 70 pupils from each of the four grade levels, freshman through senior. Of the seventy students in each grade level, 35 were male and 35 were female. Since Nicolet's black student
population was so small, an attempt was made to obtain information for
all blacks.
The first set of cover letters and questionnaires was mailed in mid-April of 1982. The second mailing took place in May. A follow-up postcard was mailed approximately two weeks after the second mailing. Since respondents were to remain anonymous, questionnaires were mailed and received by Nicolet personnel. The questionnaires and envelopes in which they were mailed had been numbered from 1 to 427. These codes corresponded to the five digit student identification numbers. School personnel were given a list of student identification numbers and cor-responding codes. Nicolet staff then matched the student I.D. numbers and codes with pupils' places of residence and placed address labels on the envelopes. This procedure protected the anonymity of all par-ticipating households.
Almost 25% of total returns were received during the week follow-ing the first mailing. Another 25% came during the following week.
126
Responses to the second mailing followed a,similar pattern with ap-proximately 25% of responses returned during the first week and another 18% in the second week. The follow-up postcard brought about 18 or only 10% of returns.
Table 3.3 shows that 90, or 53.6% of the students whose parents returned the questionnaire were females and 46.4% were males. The response rate for the parents of freshmen was highest, followed by sophomores, juniors, and seniors. This may be partially due to will-ingness on the part of parents whose children have yet to complete a grade level to participate in a study endorsed by the school.
The response rate for whites was significantly higher than for blacks. Tables 3.5 and 3.6 show that the response rate for whites was 45.71% as compared to 27.218 for blacks. Nearly 30% of parents of 220 students returned the questionnaire, compared to 21.74% of resident black parents. (See Tables 3.7 and 3.8).
TABLE 3.3
TOTAL RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL
AND SEX OF STUDENT
Year in --
School
Senior
Junior
Sophomore
Sex Total
Male Female Responses
-
14 19 33
23 19 42
19 26 45
Freshman 22 26
78 90
48
168 1,679
Total Total Responses
Population as % of population
424
441
407
407 11.79
7.78
9.52
11.05
10.00
127
Year in School
Senior
Junior 21
Sophomore
Freshman
TABLE 3.4
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL Ape SEX
OF STUDENT FOR WHITE STUDENT POPULATION
Sex Total Total Total Responses as
Male Female Responses Population % of Population
10 15 25
15 36
17 31
36
14
16 20
389
410
369
364
6.45
8.78
8.40
9.89
61 67 128 1,532 8.36
Year in School
TABLE 3.5
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL Amp SEX
OF STUDENT FOR WHITE STUDENT SAMPLE
Sex Total Total Total Responses
Male Female Responses Sample Size as of % of Sample
Senior 10 15 25 70 35.71
Junior 21 15 36 70 51.43
Sophomore 14 17 31 70 44.29
Freshman 16 20 36 70 51.43
61 67 128 280 45.71
128
TABLE 3.6
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL AND SEX
OF STUDENT FOR BLACK STUDENT POPULATION
Year in Sex Total Total Total Responses
School Male Female Responses Population as ~ of Population
Senior 4 4 8 35 22.86
Junior 2 4 6 31 19.35
Sophomore 5 9 14 38 36.84
Freshman 6 6 12 43 27.91
17 23 40 147 27,21
TABLE 3.7
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL AND SEX
OF STUDENT FOR CHAPTER 220 BLACK STUDENTS
Year in Sex Total Total Total Responses
School Mile Female Responses Population as of % Population
Senior 1 4 5 19 26.32
Junior 0 3 3 21 14.29
Sophomore 4 8 12 27 44.44
Freshman 5 5 10 34 29.41
10 20 30 101 29.70
129
Year in School
TABLE 3.8
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL AND SEX
OF STUDENT FOR RESIDENT BLACK STUDENTS
Sex Total Total Total Responses
Male Female Responses Population as of % Population
Senior 3 0 3 16 18.75
Junior 2 1 3 10 30.00
Sophomore 1 1 2 11 18.18
Freshman 1 1 2 9 22.22
7 3 10 46 21.74
Respondent
The overwhelming majority of the respondents, 106 or 63.9%, were mothers. Almost 20% of the questionnaires were returned by fathers, and roughly 16% by both parents, for totals of 33 and 27 respectively. In two instances the identities of respondents were not reported.
TABLE 3.9
RESPONSES BY QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONDENT Ado RACE
Race Race as % of Total
Total White Black Whites Blacks Percent
_ . _
Mothers 106 75 31 70.75 29.25 100.00
Fathers 33 29 4 87.88 12.12 100.00
Both parents 27 22 5 31.48 18.52 100.00
Unknown 2 2 0 100.00 9.00 100.00
TOTALS 168 128 40 76.19 23.81 100.00
130
SOCIOECONOMIC CHARAclkRISTICS OF THE SAMPLE
Only seventeen white families, or 13.4i, had annual family in-comes of below $25,000. Approximately 43% had incomes ranging between S25,000 and $49,999. Fifty-five families or 43% earned $50,000 or more per year. The majority of the families of Chapter 220 students earned less than S25,000 annually. Almost 18% of families in this group had yearly incomes of between $25,000 and $49,000. Five families of transfer students, or 17.9`, earned $50,000 or more annually. In-come was reported for only seven resident black families. All of these families earned at least $25,000 per year. Two families, or 28.6$, had incomes ranging between $25,000 and $49,999 and 71.4% earned $50,000 or more.
The income figures for blacks are combined in Table 3.10. As the table shows, white families had significantly higher incomes than blacks as a group. Almost 50% of black families earned less than $25,000 yearly compared to only 13% of white families.
Almost 50\ of the fathers of white students completed a four-year college degree. Approximately 44\ completed college and 7% ob-tained graduate and professional degrees (law, medical, etc.). The educational level of black fathers was considerably lower than that of whites. Nearly 70% of black fathers did not complete a college degree. Of the five black fathers who did not complete college (13%), three were the fathers of resident black students. About 13% of black fathers completed graduate or professional degrees, all of whom were the fathers of 220 black students. The educational level of fathers
131
TABLE 3.10
ANNUAL FAllILY INCOME BY RACE
Group Absolute Frequency % of Totals
WHITES 127 100.0
Below $25,000 17 13.4
$25,000-$49,999 55 43.3
$50,000 or more 55 43.3
BLACKS 35 100.0
Below $25,000 17 48.6
$25,000-$49,999 7 20.0
$50,000 or more 11 31.4
TOTAL 162 100.0
Below $25,000 34 29.9
$25,000-$49,999 62 38.3
$50,000 or more 66 40.8
of resident black students was reported in nine cases.
The majority of fathers in the sample, 54.8%, did not obtain a college degree, but as Table 3.11 shows, just over 45% obtained at least a four-year college degree.
The highest educational level attained by the majority of white mothers, almost 60t, was high school graduation. Thirty-one, or 24.4\ of the mothers of white students did not complete high school. Almost
132
Group
TABLE 3.11
EDUCATION LEVEL OF FATHERS BY RACE
Absolute Frequencey
WHITES
Less than 4 year degree
Four year degree
Graduate or professional degree 9
128
63
56
BLACKS
Less than 4 year degree
Four year degree
Graduate or professional degree 5
TOTAL
Less than 4 year degree
Four year degree
Graduate or professional degree
% of Totals
100.0
49.2
43.8
7.0
38 28
166
91
61
14
100.0
73.7
13.2
13.2
100.0
54.8
36.8
8.4
23% completed at least a four year degree; and of this group, 27.6% completed graduate or professional school. The highest educational level obtained by the majority of black mothers, 56.8%, was also high school graduation. All of the black mothers in this group were parents of Chapter 220 students. A higher percentage of black mothers, 35%, completed college than white mothers. More than half of the black
133
TABLE 3.12
EDUCATIONAL LEVEL OF MOTHERS BY RACE
Absolute Frequency
127
Group
WHITES
High school or less
Some college
Four year degree
BLACKS
High school or less
Some college
Four year degree
TOTAL
High school or less
Some college
Four year degree
76
22
29
37
21
3
13
164
97
25
42
% of Totals
100.0
59.8
17.3
22.8
100.0
56.8
8.1
35.1
100.0
59.2
15.2
25.6
_
mothers who completed college (7) were the parents of resident black students, even though there were four times as many Chapter 220 par-ents responding as resident blacks.
Approximately 72% of whites (92) attended public schools prior to attending Nicolet, compared to 65% of blacks. Thirty-five percent of blacks and 28% of whites attended public schools. Two of the ten resident black respondents reported that their children had gone to
134
private schools. Over-all, 118, or 70% of students had only attended public schools.
One hundred fifty-five out of 163, or 96% of families owned their own homes. Approximately 98% of whites compared to 87% of blacks were home owners. The majority of the 166 families that reported their residence, almost 39% resided in Glendale. Approximately 24%, 17\, 17% and 3% of families lived in Fox Point, Milwaukee, Bayside, and River Hills, respectively. For whites, the residential distribution of the sample followed the same patterns. One hundred twenty-seven whites reported their place of residence. About 46%, 29%, 21% and 4% lived in Glendale, Fox Point, Bayside, and River Hills, respectively. Six of the ten families of resident black students resided in Glen-dale. Three of these families lived in Fox Point and one in Bayside.
VARIABLES ANT MEASUREMENT
In Chapters I and II, socioeconomic status, family culture, and
other concepts relevant to this research were discussed in broad
terms. This section presents the specific applications of these con-
cepts through the employment of the following set of surrogate vari-
ables:
GPA: Grade point average was the measure of academic achievement em-
ployed. When used in multiple regression analysis, GPA was always
a dependent variable. It is defined as the cumulative GPA of students
for the 1981-1982 school year on a 5.0 sclae and was measured in
135
absolute terms. F~THER'S EDUCATION: Mother's education refers to the highest level of education attained by students' mothers at the time of the survey. Nine categories ranging from (1) less than seven years, to (9) other--please specify, were used to measure this variable. These original categories were then collapsed into three categories which were: (a) high school or less, (b) at least one year in college, but did not obtain a four year degree, and (c) at least a four year degree. A meanof 4.5, for example, would indicate that mothers completed high school but did not complete one full year of college.27 FATHER'S EDUCATION: This variable was defined and measured in the same manner as the previous variable, but pertains to fathers. It too was collapsed into three categories, which were: (a) less than a four year degree, (b) at least a four year degree, but did not com-plete a graduate or professional degree, and (c) graduate or profes-sional degree. The mean for this variable represents the same educa-tional level as for MCTHER'S EDUCATION.28 }lOTHER'S OCCUPATION: This variable was defined as the full or part-time occupations of students' mothers at the time of the survey (spring 1982). Respondents were asked to provide a brief description of mother's present occupations, which were then translated into NORC scores. The North-Hatt occupational prestige index (NORC) assigns values to occupations based on occupational prestige, education, and income, and is one of the most widely used measures of occupational
136
status. It is generally employed in survey research.29
FATHER'S OCCUPATION: Defined and measured in the same manner as the
preceding variable, it refers to the occupations fo students' fathers.
INCOME: Income was defined as the annual income from employment
earned by both parents (when applicable). It was measured in seven
categories ranging from (1) less than $5,000 to (7) $50,000 or more.
These original categories were collapsed into three, which were:
(a) less than $25,000, (b) S25,000 to $49,999, and (c) $50,000 or
more. A mean of 5.0, for example, would indicate that a family earned
between $20,000 and $24,999 annually. 30
HKi£ OWNERSHIP: This variable refers to whether parents own or rent
their homes.
P.\REN~S' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS: Parent's educational aspirations
refers to how strongly parents feel about their children getting a
college education. Respondents were asked whether and to what extent
they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: "I would like
my children to get a college education." A mean of 1.0 represents
strong disagreement with the statement indicating low parents' educa-
tional aspirations. A mean of 5.0 represents high educational aspira-
tions.
PARENTS' READING HABITS: This variable measures how frequently parents'
read books for pleasure. Five response categories ranging from (1)
never to (5) frequently, were used to measure parents' reading habits.
A mean of 1.0 indicates that parents never read books for pleasure.
r'
~ lj
1
137
A mean Of 5.0 represe
Sequent reading for Pleasu
1 Participation is a measur f
ent of Parental invOlV
n school related activities. The exte
t to which Parents (1) attended large-scale
Social functions (bat
raiSerS, etC.). (2) were in 1
ubs or Organizations as
, nd (3) participated in Sol
activities, was deter
same S~P°int scale Used t
the previous variable
were Collapsed into a si 1
A mean of 2.o, for example, indicates that parents __--in Social activities
PTA MEETINGS:
Parents rarely participat d
is variable to the frequency of parent
Parent/Teacher Or a
g nization att
It was measured in the
manner as PARENT A mean of 1~0 Would indic
parents never attende n Of S. Of that they
tended.
SIZE Family size is: '
._, Frequently at-
dents' families
ESTEEM: Self esteem is d f
worth Uses node it'
En (see page 19). It
eaSUred by a seven-item scat
ix items or adaptations
~ from Rosenberg~s (1965) g
self-esteem scale and
P ion of one of Coopersmith, (19 items from his Self E
steem Invent
ory.. Coopersmith's ite
to make it more suitabl
It population. The Rosenbe
the most Widely Used measu
general or global self-
138
esteem. This scale, and shorter versions of it, are often useful in research situations in which questionnaires are lengthy and/or con-tain a number of items not pertaining to self-esteem.
Five of the items were phrased in apositive direction and two in a negative direction. Four response categories ranging from (1) strongly agree to (4) strongly disagree were used for each item. A single score was obtained by computing an average over the items in the scale for each case rather than a simple sum. A mean of 4.0 re-presents high self-esteem. A mean of 1.0 indicates low self-esteem.
The scale reliability, or ALPHA, which is "the variation over an infinitely large number of independent repeated trials of error of measurement,''31 is .80318.
LOCUS OF CONTROL: Locus of control was defined as the extent to which individuals believe that events are determined by their own actions or by luck, fate, or the actions of powerful others. (See page 21). A ten item scale was used to measure locus of control. Nine of the items were statements or adaptations of statements from Rotter's (1966) 23 item Locus of Control Inventory. The other item was one of those used by Coleman (1966) to measure locus of control Rotter's inventory, which is among the most widely employed measures of internal/external control, is a forced choice scale. The response categories were the same as those used for SELF-ESTEEM. A mean of 1.0 represents a strong sense of external control. A strong sense of internal control is
represented by a mean of 4.0. ALPHA for the scale is .80023.
139
EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES: Extracurricular activities was defined as the extent of student involvement in school activities (such as clubs and student government) other than organized sports. It was measured by determining whether students were (1) not involved at all, (2) somewhat involved, or (3) very involved in school activities. SUSPENSIONS: This variable refers to the number of times students had been suspended while attending Nicolet. AGE: Age refers to the age of students in years. SEX: Sex was defined as male or female. PRIOR SCHOOL STATUS: Prior school status was determined by whether students had ever attended private schools prior to attending Nicolet. PREVIOUS SCHOOLS ATTENDED: This variable refers to the school at-tended by students prior to Nicolet. Ten categories were created by determining the nine schools most co D nly attended by students prior to Nicolet and classifying any other school as (1) other. Three of the schools, (1) Maple Dale, (2) Glen Hills, and (3) Bayside Middle, are Nicolet Feeder schools. Four were the most co D nly attended private schools by black and white students. The remaining two were the schools most commonly attended by Chapter 220 students. CONDITION_ OF ATTENDANCE: Conditions of attendance refers to whether students (1) were white and resided in the school district, (2) were black and attended under the Chapter 220 program, or (3) were black and lived in the Nicolet district.
RESIDENCE: Residence refers to whether families lived in (1) Fox
140
Point, (2) River Hills, (3) Bayside, (4) Glendale, or (5) Milwaukee. RACE: Race was defined as black or white.
Other's education, father's education, mother's occupation, father's occupation, income, and home ownership are classified as status variables. Income, education, and occupation are the most com-monly employed measures of socioeconomic status. The purchasing of a home is a reflection of financial status.
Family culture is reflected in a set of internal and external measures. The internal measures, parents' educational aspirations, self-esteem, and locus of control, represent parental attitudes and values. If the common argument that family size is a reflection of parental attitudes and values is accepted, family size too can be con-sidered an internal measure. Parents' reading habits, social parti-cipation and attendance at PTA meetings are behavior patterns, or the outward manifestations of attitudes and values, and therefore repre-sent external measures of family culture.
Involvement in extracurricular activities, number of suspensions, age, and sex are student characteristics. The conditions under which students attend Nicolet represent student mobility status. CONDITIONS OF ATIE}3lANCE is technically a student characteristic, but it is also a reflection of parental status and aspects of family culture. The decision of parents to involve their children in the Chapter 220 pro-gram, for example, may be a reflection of educational aspirations for them.
141
The school attended by a student prior to Nicolet as well as PRIOR SCHOOL STATUS are school characteristics.
RESIDENCE is an environmental variable. Like CONDITIONS OF AUn12dDANCE, it reflects parental status and attitudes and values not investigated in this research. Although socioeconomic status for the most part determines whether one can afford to purchase a home in middle and upper class suburbs, having a given income does not nec-essarily mean that one will do so. Some people prefer to live within the city.
RACE is considered a social characteristic. While race is also a biological trait, the argument that genetic differences between blacks and whites determine or influence academic achievement is re-jected. Instead, it is argued that past and present discrimination against blacks is largely responsible for differences in socioeconomic status between blacks and whites. This is not to imply that the atti-tudes and values held by some blacks have not affected their mobility. These attitudes and values, however, are influenced by social status and economic position. Coleman (1966), for example, reported that children from disadvantaged groups (including blacks) were more ex-ternal in their control beliefs. The unresponsive nature of their environments was cited as one of the reasons (see page 16).
142
TABLE 3.13
NS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELEc-1tD
VARIABLES USED IN ANALYSIS
Total Whites Blacks
SPA 3.70 3.90 2 98
(.97) (.93) ( 74)
bbther's Education 4.54 4.78
(1.50) (1.96)*
Father's Education 5.64 4.61
- (1.546) (1.g5)**
Nbther's Occupation 48.32 46.97 52.18
(29.16) (29.60) (28.24)
Father's Occupation 70.32 76.18 50.14
(22.40) (14.14) (32.31)
Income 6.18 4.97***
(1.03) (2.107)
Parents' Educational Aspi- 4.71 4.66 4.86
- rations (.60) (.65) (3~35)
Parents' Reading Habits 4.04 4.10 3.86
(1.02) (1.10) (1.07)
Social Participation 3.16 3.16 3.28
(.90) (~87) (.87)
PTA Meetings 2.93 2.80 3.42
(1.21) (1.20) (1.31)
Family Size 2.79 2.83 2.66
(1.30) (1.34) (1.15)
Self-Esteem 3.42 3.39 3.51
(.38) (.37) (.40)
Locus of Control 3.08 3.05 3.16
(.39) (.38) (.40)
143
TABLE 3.13 (continued)
_ _ .
Extracurricular Activities 1.84 1 86 1.92
(.64) ( 63) (.70)
Suspensions 1.11 1.11 1.11
(.45) (.46) (.40)
Age 15.88 15.94 15.70
(1.29) (1.31) (1.22)
TOTAL, N = 160 WHITES, N = 124 BLACKS, N = 36
* Means and standard deviations for mother's education based on Ns of 127 and 37 for whites and blacks, respectively.
** Mbans and standard deviations for father's education based on Ns of 128 and 38 for whites and blacks, respectively.
*** Means and standard deviations for income based on Ns of 127 and 35 for blacks and whites, respectively.
TABLE 3.14
lDi4NS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELECTED
CHARACTERISTICS OF MOTHERS, FATHERS, AND BOTH PARENTS
Both Parents Fathers
Mothers
Parents' Educational 4.85 4.85 4.63
Aspirations (~36) (.37) (.69)
Parents' Reading Habits 4.26 3.66 4.11
(.86) (1.15) (.99)
Social Participation 3.38 2.99 3.19
(1.01) (.74) (.88,
PTA Meetings 3.11 2.81 2.93
(1.48) (1.36) (1.09)
Self-Esteem 3.56 3.51 3.35
(.40) (.40) (.36)
144
TABLE 3.14 (continued)
Locus of Control 3.21 3.15 3.02
(.48) (.35) (.36)
BOTH PARENTS, N = 27 FATHERS, N = 33 fXT1HERS, N = 100
The major hypotheses pertain to the association between socio-
economic status, family culture, race, and academic achievement and
are as follows:
HI Higher levels of mothers' education are positively associated with student achievement.
H2 Higher levels of fathers' education are positively associated with student achievement.
H3 Higher family income levels are positively associated with student achievement.
H4 Higher fathers' occupational status is positively associated with student achievement.
H5 Higher parentalsocial participation is positively associated with student achievement.
H6 Higher parental self-esteem is positively associated with student achievement.
H7 Stronger parental sense of internal co ntrol is positively associ-ated with student achievement.
Ha Higher parental educational aspirations are positively associated with student achievement.
145
Hg Higher frequencies of parental attendance at PTA meetings are positively associated with student achievement.
Hlo Higher parental frequencies of reading books for pleasure are positively associated with student achievement.
Hll Race is negatively associated with student achievement.
The following hypotheses pertaining to the relationships between
student and school characteristics and achievement will also be ex-
amined:
H12 Higher numbers of student suspensions are negatively associated with student achievement.
H13 Greater student involvement in extracurricular activities is positively associated with student achievement.
H14 Private school attendance will be positively associated with academic achievement.
146
~ IV
DATA ANALYSIS
ACADEMIC ACHIE\~{ENT
Three stepwise multiple regression proceedures with listwise deletion of missing data were performed in order to examine the hy-pothesized relationships between socioeconomic status variables, measures of family culture, school characteristics, attributes of students, race, and academic achievement. Grade point average (GPA) is the dependent variable in all three equations. Table 4.3 contains information on total student achievement. The independent variables were: mothers' education, fathers' education, fathers' occupation, income, parents' educational aspirations, social participation, parents' reading habits, self-esteem, locus of control, family size, age, sex, suspensions, extracurricular activities, previous school status, and race. Table 4.4 contains information on white student achievement. The independent variables were the same as in the first procedure with the exception of race. Information on the predictors and correlates of black student achievement is presented in Table 4.5. The independent variables were the same as those used in the analysis of white student acheivement with the addition of conditions of at-tendance and home ownership. There was not enough variation in home ownership for white parents to use this variable in the analysis of their children's achievement.
147
SOCIOECONoMIC STATUS AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVED
-
This section analyzes the data pertaining to socioeconomic status variables and GPA.
The findings reported in Table 4.3 support the hypothesized re-lationships between mothers' education and achievement, fathers' educa-tion and achievement, and income and achievement. The literature on SES and achievement generally supports these findings [Kelin (1971), Bunnell (1971), St. John (1970)1. Fotheringham and Creal (1971) em-ployed fathers' schooling, mothers' schooling, fathers' occupation, and family income as measures of SES and found that SES variables accounted for 28% of the variation in reading achievement and 25' of the variance in arithmetic computation. Sexton (1961) found that the Iowa Achievement Test scores of both elementary and high school students rose with family income levels.
Table 4.3 shows that the strongest predictor of GPA for all students is fathers' not having completed a four-year college degree. The unstandardized regression coefficient for the association between GPA and the father not completing a college degree is -.708 and is significant at the .01 level. The standardized regression coefficient or Beta, is -.346. A moderate negative correlation (r - -.497) was found between GPA and the fathers' not having completed college. Mothers' educational level is also a strong predictor of achievement for all students. The unstandardized regression coefficient for the association between GPA and mothers' completion of a four-year college
.
148
degree is .412 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .202 The correlation between GPA and mothers' college completion is less than moderate, (r - .292).
Family size was also found to predict achievement but is not as strong a predictor as mothers' and fathers' educational levels. Beta for this association is .136. The unstandardized regression coef-ficient is .101 and is significant at the .05 level. The correlation between GPA and family size (r ~ .103) is weak. This finding is in-consistent with most of the literature on the subject. Sowell (1975) reported that large family size is negatively correlated with income. Since higher income is positively related to achievement, Sowell's findings would indicate that large family size has a negative impact on student performance. Scott and Robes (1974) found that the achieve-ment of black children from small families is significantly higher than that of black students from large families. Studies concluding that large family size, like that performed by Scott and Kobes, often compare large families to very small families. This may account for these findings. The average family size of students in the present investigation (mean a 2.79), was relatively small. Additionally, there is not a great deal of variation (SD - 1.30) in family size.
Family income, like family size, is not as strong a predictor of GPA as parents' educational levels. Beta for the association between GPA and a family income of 550,000 or more is .134 and B is .264, which is significant at the .05 level. There is a moderate
149
positive correlation between a family income of ss~,,ono or more and GAP (r ~ .3093.
The correlation between GPA and fathers' occupation was negli-glible (r - .074). There `'as a moderate correlation (r a .3S5) between fathers' occupation and father's completion Of a graduate or profes-sional degree. The results contained in Table 4.4 support the hypothesized relationships between fathers' education and achievement and income and achievement. Again, these findings are consistent with the literature 1Knief and Stroud (1959), Fetter (1975)].
The father not completing a college degree is the strongest pre-dictor of achievement for white students. The unstandardized regres-sion coefficient for this association is -.876 and is significant at the .01 level. The standardized regression coefficient is -.416. There is a moderate negative correlation (r ~ .508) between GPA and fathers' not completing college.
A family income of $50,000 or more has a moderate positive cor-relation (r ~ .332) with GPA, and is also a strong predictor of achieve-ment. The unstandardized regression coefficient for this relationship is .360 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .203. Family size ants the last status variable found to be a predictor of white student achievement. The beta coefficient is .170. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .118 and is significant at the .05 level. Pather's occupation only had a correlation of .04~ with GPA. The
1
150
correlations between the various status characteristics are all quite weak with the exception of that between fathers' occupation and fathers' completion of a graduate or professional degree, which was .340.
The results reported in Table 4.5 support the hypothesized rela-tionships between mothers' education and academic achievement and home ownership and achievement. Epps (1974) found that mothers' education had a significant positive correlation with the grades of Southern black female high school students. Murname, Maynard and Ohls (1980) found that the children of black mothers who completed high school achieved at significantly higher levels than black students whose mothers did not complete high school.
Beta for the relationship between GPA and mothers' completion of a four-year college degree is .397. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .610 and is significant at the .01 level. The correla-tion between the two is .651, which is considered moderate given the small population size. The unstandardized regression coefficient for the association between home ownership and GPA is .710 and significant at the .01 level. The beta coefficient for the relationship is .388. Like mothers' education, home ownership has a moderate positive cor-relation with GPA.
There are a number of intercorrelations between status character-istics that are worth noting. Fathers' occupation, which only has a correlation of .270 with GPA; has a correlation of -.400 with
.,
l
151
mothers' high school completion. The correlation between fathers' occupation and conditions of attendance was .521. The correlation between fathers' completion of graduate or professional school and conditions of attendance is .614. There is also a moderate positive correlation of .434 between GPA and conditions of attendance for blacks. One reason that conditions of attendance did not predict achievement may be that it is moderately correlated with several status characteristics and is a function of these characteristics.
A test of the difference in means (t-test) was performed in order to examine the proposition that the grade point averages of resident black students are significantly higher than those of Chapter 220 stu-dents. The difference in the achievement of the two groups was highly significant. For resident black students, the mean GPA was 3.489 and the standard deviation was .698. The mean GPA of Chapter 220 students was 2.786 and the standard deviation was .662. At 34 degrees of freedom, the T value was -2.81 and the 2-tail probability was .008, significant at the .01 level.
An explanation for the differences in the achievement of the two groups may be significant differences in the predictors of achievement. Mothers of resident black students (see Chapter III) had higher educa-tional levels than the mothers of Chapter 220 students. Additionally, all resident black parents were home owners.
Discussion
The findings generally supported the hypothesized relationships
152
between SES variables and academic achievement. The major exception is that fathers' occupational status was not significantly associated with achievement for total white,or black students. An examination of the correlations between fathers' occupation and other status characteristics did not reveal any strong associations.
One possible explanation for the finding of no significant asso-ciation between fathers' occupation and achievement is that occupation is a function of education and that once fathers' educational level entered the equations, the effects of occupation were in part explained. Another explanation is that fathers' occupation is often used as the only indicator of SES. The effects of other indicators go unnoticed. As stated in Chapter II, occupation, which is generally measured by scores on O.D. Duncan's Socioeconomic Index or the NORC Index, is the most widely used single indicator of SES. White (1982), who performed one of the most extensive reviews of the literature on SES and achieve-ment, concluded that of all the traditional measures of socioeconomic status, income is the highest single correlate of achievement. Cole-man (1966) concluded that parents' education has the highest relation to achievement for blacks and whites. Finally, Epps (1974) found that fathers' occupation had almost no relationship to the school grades of black students.
FA>lILY CULTURE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
The results in Table 4.3 support the hypothesized relationship
153
between parents' educational aspirations and academic achievement. Numerous studies have found that parents' educational aspirations have a positive influence on achievement [Babcock (1972), Crandall, Dewey, Katkowsky, and Preston (1964), and Keeves (1972)]. Gigliotti and Brookover (1975) found a strong relationship between student achievement and parents' educational aspirations.
Table 4.3 shows that parents' educational aspirations is the only family culture variable that is a predictor of achievement for all students. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .301 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .186. The weak correlation found between parents' educational aspirations (.161) is consistent with Pugh's (1976) findings reported in Chapter II.
Table 4.4 shows that parents' educational aspirations is a pre-dictor of achievement for white students. Beta is .203. The un-standardized regression coefficient is .293 and is significant at the .01 level. The correlation between SPA and parents' educational aspi-rations (.255) is weak.
Parents' educational aspirations are relatively unrelated to any of the family culture or SES variables even though this variable, ac-cording to White (1982), is sometimes employed as a measure of SES. The highest correlations between parents' educational aspirations and other family culture variables were those between parents' educational aspirations and self-esteem (.281), and parents' educational aspira-tions and locus of control (.256).
154
The hypothesized relationship between social participation and student achievement is supported for blacks, '['able 4.3 shows that social participation is positively correlated with achievement (r = .417). Beta is .279. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .229 and is significant at the .01 level.
The social participation of blacks is related to SES c~.,~onents and other family culture variables. The correlations between GPA and fathers' occupation, mothers' completion of a college degree, and fathers' completion of a graduate or professional degree are .286, .289, and .419, respectively. Social participation is relatively unrelated to income. There is a relatively high correlation between self-esteem and the social participation of blacks Or - .717). Mbderate correla-tions between social participation and locus of control (r - .434), parents' reading habits (r ~ .556), and attendance at PTA meetings (r - .550). The correlation between social participation and parents' educational aspirations is .338.
These findings are consistent with those of Blau (1981). Blau reported correlations of .43, .32, and .31 between extrafamilial par-ticipation and mother's education, father's, and and mother's occupa-tional status, respectively. 'the correlation between extrafamilial participation, which was defined as mothers' participation in voluntary associations, was .19 for blacks and .17 for whites.
The hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and self-esteem, locus of control, attendance at PTA meetings, and parents'
155
reading habits were not supported by the results of the three regres-sion analyses. The strength of the associations between the social participation of blacks and other family culture variables and SES characteristics, however, prompted an investigation of the factors related to social partlc~pation for blacks and whites.
Two stepwise multiple procedures with listwise deletion of missing data were performed in order to determine the predictors of social par-ticipation for blacks and whites. Social participation was the de-pendent variable in both analyses. Table 4.1 contains data pertaining to the social participation of blacks, The independent variables were parents' educational aspirations, self-esteem, locus of control, parents' reading habits, PTA meeting attendance, mothers' occupation, fathers' occupation, mothers' education, fathers' education, and income. Table 4.2 contains information on the social participation of whites. The independent variables were the same used to examine the social par-ticipation of blacks.
Table 4.1 shows that the only dependent variable that is a pre-dictor of black student achievement is self-esteem. The correlation between social participation and self-esteem is relatively strong (r - .747), Beta, as is the unstandardized regression coefficient, is .747 which is significant at the ,01 level. Self-esteem accounts for approximately 55% of the total variation in the social participation of blacks.
Social participation is moderately correlated with locus of
156
control (r - .536), parents' reading habits (r = .395), mothers' high school graduation (r ~ -.367), mothers' college completion (r = .362), and fathers' completion of a graduate or professional degree (r = .390) The correlations between social participation and parents' educational aspirations, PTA meeting attendance, mothers' occupation, and fathers' occupation are 281, 335, ,324, and .335, respectively.
TABLE 4.1 REGRESSION OF SOCIAL PARTICIPATION ON PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, PARENTS' READING HABITS, PTA MEETING ATTENDANCE, METHERS' OCCUPATION, FATHERS' OCCUPATION, ME THE RS' EDUCA-TION, FATHERS' EDUCATION, AND INCOME FOR BLACKS.
B BETA CORREL ADJRSQ T
(1) Self-esteem .747 .747 .747 N - 39, R2 . .558 **Significant at .01 level.
.546 6.829**
As shown in Table 4.2, the strongest predictor of social partici-pation for whites also is self-esteem. Beta is 308 The unstandardized regression coefficient is .742 and is significant at the .01 level. There is a moderate positive correlation between social participation and self-esteem (r - .368), A family income of S50,000 or more is the second strongest predictor of the social participation of whites. The
157
correlation between the two variables is relatively weak (r = .248). The unstandardized regression coefficient is .377 and is significant at the ,01 level. Attendance at PTA meetings also predicts social participation for whites but is not as strong a predictor as self-esteem and income. Beta is .189. The unstandardized regression co-efficient is .141 and is significant at the .05 level. The correlation between social participation and PTA meeting attendance is quite weak (r = .182J, The three variables accounted for only 20% of the total variation in social participation for whites.
Social participation is relatively unrelated to any of the other variables in the equation with the exception of locus of control (r a 262J and family income of over S50,000 per year (r - .248).
TABLE 4.2
REGRESSION OF SOCIAL PARTICIPATION ON' PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, PARENTS' READING HABITS, PTA MEETING ATTENDANCE, htnODERS' OCCUPATION, FATHERS' OCCUPATION, Panniers' EDUCATION, FATHERS' EDUCATION, AND INOoME P0R hHITES.
D
(1) Self-esteem .742
(2) Family income of
$50,000 or more .377
aJ PTA meeting attendance
N - 127, R2 . ,200
*Significant at .0S level
**Significant at .01 level
BETA SORREL
.308 .368
,211 ,248
,141 .189 ,182
ADJRSQ T
_
.129 3.699**
.152 2.521**
,180 2.294*
158
Discussion
Self-esteem is the strongest predictor of social participation for both blacks and whites. This characteristic is a stronger predic-tor of social participation for blacks than whites. The correlation between PTA meeting attendance and social participation was stronger for blacks than whites, but PTA meeting attendance was not a predictor of the social participation of blacks. An income of $50,000 or more predicted social participation for whites but income was relatively unrelated to social participation for blacks.
One possible explanation for this finding is that there is a sig-nificant difference in the social participation of blacks and whites. A t-test of differences in means, however, indicates that there is no significant difference in the social participation of blacks and whites. For whites, the mean for social participation is 3.125 and the standard deviation is .886. For blacks, the mean for social participation is 3.250 and the standard deviation is .960. At 166 degrees of freedom, the T-value was -.76 and the 2-tail probability was .446, indicating that the social participation of the two groups is quite similar. The results of a T-test also show that the social participation of white parents and the parents of Chapter 220 students is very similar. At 156 degrees of freedom, the T-value was .19 and the 2-tail probability was .846. There is also no significant difference in the social par-ticipation of C apter 220 black parents and resident black parents, although the difference in the social participation of these two groups
159
is greater than that observed between white parents and the parents of Chapter 220 students. The mean for social participation for Chap-ter 220 black parents in 3.089 and the standard deviation is 1.032. The mean for social participation for resident black parents is 3.733 and the standard deviation is .466. At 38 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -1.90 and the 2-tail probability is .065. While the social participation of the two groups is not significantly different, the difference in social participation between these two groups is greater than that between the parents of whites and Chapter 220 students and between blacks and whites generally. There is also more variation in the social participation of the parents of Chapter 220 students. Sig-nificant differences were found in the social participation of white parents and resident black parents. At 136 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -2.14 and the 2-tail probability is .034. Resident black parents were more socially active than both white parents and the parents of Chapter 220 students. The parents of Chapter 220 students were the least socially active of the three groups. There is more variation in the social participation of blacks than in the social participation of whites.
When the family culture characteristic that was a predictor of
white student achievement was examined (parents' educational aspira-tions), no significant differences were found between the aspirations of white, resident black, and Chapter 220 black parents. The mean for whites on this variable is 4.633 and the standard deviation is .719. For the parents of Chapter 220 students, the mean is 4.833 and the
c
160
standard deviation is .379. The results of the T-test show that at 156 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -1.48 and the 2-tail probability is .142. There is more variation in parents' educational aspirations for whites than for the parents of Chapter 220 students. For resident black parents, the mean for this variable is 5.000. At 38 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -1.38 and the 2-tail probability is .176 when the educational aspirations of resident and Chapter 220 black parents are compared. When the educational aspirations of white and resident black parents were examined, the T-value at 136 degrees of freedom was -1.61 and the 2-tail probability was .110. The educational aspirations of resident black parents are the highest and those of whites are the lowest. When the educational aspirations of whites are cu,,~ared to blacks as a group, the difference is significant. For blacks, the mean is 4.875 and the standard deviation is .335. At 166 degrees of freedom the T-value is -2.06 and the 2-tail probability is .041.
The finding that parents' educational aspirations influence achieve-ment is consistent with the majority of research on the subject. Seg-iner (1983) stated that despite variations in definitions of parents' expectations, academic achievement, respondents' characteristics, and data collection methods, empirical studies generally support the con-tention that parents' educational expectations influence performance. Boocock (1972) stated that "it is clear that high achieving children tend to come from families who have high expectations for them and who make greater demands at an earlier age.1 Ibst investigations of the effects of parents' educational expectations and academic achievement
161
have found moderate correlations between the two [Reeves (1972), Shipman, McKee, and Bridgeman (1976), and Seginer (1982)].
Seginer (1983) stated that the three antecedents of parents' edu-cational expectations are: (a) school feedback, which pertains to the evaluation schools send to parents concerning the child's academic achievement, (b) the parents' educational aspirations for themselves, and (c) parental knowledge, which pertains to parents as naive psycholo-gists and educators.
One reason that parents' educations aspirations predicted the achievement of white students but not black students may be that the school feedback that white parents receive is more positive than that received by black parents. Another reason may be that the educational aspirations of white parents are more realistic than those of black parents. Coleman (1966) reported that black parents' educational aspi-rations were higher than those of white parents.
The results of a T-test confirm Coleman's findings. Black parents' educational aspirations are significantly higher than white parents' educational aspirations. For white parents, the mean for parents' aspi-rations is 4.633 and the standard deviation is .719. For black parents, the mean in 4.875 and the standard deviation is 4.875. The T-value is -2.06 and at 166 degrees of freedom, the 2-tail probability is .041.
The hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and the other family culture variables were not confirmed. As noted earlier, however, self-esteem was a strong predictor of social participation for blacks. There are also moderate correlations between several family
162
culture variables for blacks.
STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS AND ACAD~RC ACHIEVEMENT
Number of suspensions is the only student characteristic that predicts achievement. Table 4.3 shows that for the total sample of students, number of suspensions is a strong predictor of achievement. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.468 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is -.213. There is a negative correlation (r = -.251) between suspensions and achievement for all students.
For white students, number of suspensions is the second strongest predictor of achievement. As Table 4.1 shows, the correlation between GPA and number of suspensions for white students (r - -.257) is about the same as the correlation betwen GPA and number of suspensions for all students. Beta is -.206 and the unstandardized regression coeffi-cient is -.415 and is significant at the .01 level. There are no signi-ficant relationships between number of suspensions and any of the other variables examined for whites.
Number of suspensions is more strongly correlated with black stu-dent achievement than white student achievement. There is a moderate negative correlation (r-.370) between number of suspensions and GPA for black students. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.597 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .324. There is a moderately negative relationship between suspensions and female sex status for black students (r ~ .335). There is no significant difference in the number
163
of suspensions of black and white students. The mean number of sus-pensions of resident and Chapter 220 black students is the same, 1.1000. The white student suspension rate was slightly higher (mean = 1.1250) but the difference in black and white student suspension rates was insignificant.
Status of prior schooling is a strong predictor of achievement for black students. The correlation between GPA and public school at-tendance, however, is almost negligible (r = -.146). Beta is -.270. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.407 and is significant at the .01 level.
Status of prior schooling also predicts total student achievement. The correlations between public school attendance and GPA is -.012. Beta is -.132. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.280 and is significant at the .05 level.
The reason for this finding is probably accounted for by the fact that Milwaukee public schools do not provide the same quality of in-struction as many private schools. Additionally, instruction methods in private schools may be more similar to those used at Nicolet.
Discussion
Disciplinary actions against students are often influenced by teachers' and administrators' perceptions of them. These perceptions in turn, have been found to be influenced by parental social and eco nomical status. Hollingshead (1949) reported that the school super-intendent was very sensitive to pressures from families who were in -
164
position to influence school board members. One example cited of how parents' social class position influenced student discipline involved implementation of the high school's tardy rule. Hollingshead reported that the teachers in the high school voted unanimously to send all tardy students to dentention with no exceptions. The superintendent, however, objected to the no-exceptions provision. He remarked:
You cannot make a rule like that stick in this town. There are students who simply cannot be sent to detention. Their families will not stand for it. I look for trouble from this.1
The second week after the rule went into effect, the daughter of a prominent family did not report to detention. That night her mother telephoned the superintendent's wife concerning a church supper and mentioned that the daughter had an appointment at the hairdresser. When the principal spoke to the girl the next day, he told her to go to class and not to let the situation happen again. Another incident involved the son of a prominent family. The young man was late for school and the principal ordered him to spend an hour in detention. The student did not report for detention, so the principal telephoned the boy's father and instructed him to get the son to the school right away. By the time the student arrived at the school, the principal had left and the superintendent had the young man sit in his outer office for a while and excused him from. detention. When a student from one of the lower class families refused to report for detention for having been tardy, the principal and superintendent hit the boy several times and insisted that he not return to school without his father. The incident resulted
165
in the young man quitting school.
Kerchhoff and Campbell (1977) found that disciplinary problems were related to both black and white educational attainment. Wilson (1979) concluded that the effects of disciplinary problems on academic attainment are more important in an integrated setting than in a segre-gated setting.
while it was hypothesized that participation in school activities would influence SPA, this was not the case. For whites, the correla-tion between SPA and participation in school activities is only .127. For blacks, the correlation between these two variables is higher (r = .332). There is a moderate correlation between participation in school activities and father's completion of a graduate or professional degree (r = .520). For whites, the correlation between the two vari-ables was also moderate (r = .305).
Student participation in extracurricular activities has also been found to be class related [Hollingshead (1949) and Sexton (1961)]. Sexton (1961) viewed participation in extracurricular activities as a good indication of how much student interest there is in the school. She stated that usually only the "successful" students who feel some attachment to the school tend to become involved in school activities, while students who feel alienated rarely participate in school activi-ties. Hollingshead (1949) found that upper class students dominated Elmtown High School's extracurricular activities. One hundred percent of the students in classes I and II were involved in extracurricular activities. Only 27% of students from the lowest class participated
166
in extracurricular activities.
There were no significant differences in the participation in extracurricular activities of whites, resident blacks, and Chapter 220 black students. All three groups were "somewhat involved" in school activities. White students were the least involved and resident blacks were the most involved. This finding appears to be inconsistent with the conclusions of other research.
Age, sex, and year in school also are not significantly related to student achievement although research indicates that black girls achieve at higher levels than black boys.
RACE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVE}D2Tr
-
Table 4.3 shows that race is a strong predictor of student achieve-ment. There is a moderate negative correlation between race (being black) and GPA (r = -.397). Beta is -.311. The unstandardized regres-sion coefficient is -.720 and is significant at the .01 level. This finding is consistent with the hypothesized relationship between race and achievement.
There are significant differences in the achievement of white and black students. The mean GPA for whites was 3.90 compared to a mean GPA for blacks of 2.98. An examination of GPA by conditions of attendance reveals that there are significant differences in the mean grade point averages of white and Chapter 220 students and resident black students. The results of a T-test show that the mean GPA of
167
Chapter 220 black students is 2.786 and the standard deviation is .662. For whites, the standard deviation is .926. At 150 degrees of freedom, the T-value is 5.81 and the 2-tail probability is .000. The mean GPA for resident black students is 3.489 and the standard deviation is .698. At 34 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -2.81 and the 2-tail probability is .008. Significant differences in GPA were not found between white and resident black students. At 134 degrees of freedom, the T-value is 1.36 and the 2-tail probability is .176.
For blacks, GPA is moderately correlated with involvement in extra-curricular activities, self-esteem, PTA meeting attendance, and con-ditions of attendance with correlations of .332, .335, .372, and .434, respectively. For whites, there were no significant correlations other than those reported in Table 4.4.
The variables in Table 4.4 accounted for approximately 40% of the variation in white student achievement. As Table 4.5 shows, however, over 70% of the variation in black student achievement is accounted for.
Discussion
-
Flost of the research that has investigated black and white achieve-ment has concluded that black students achieve at significantly lower levels than white students [Coleman (1966), Cohen, Pettigrew, and Riley (1972), Armor (1972), and Jencks (1972)]. Much of the research on the subject has concentrated on the reasons for the disparities between black and white achievement and ways to reduce or eliminate these
168
disparities. Sexton (1961) and Coleman (1966) indicated that the prob-lem of the low achievement of black students is severely compounded by differences in the socioeconomic and family environments of black and white students. The implication is that if disparities in these areas can be eliminated, differences in the achievement of the two groups can be reduced or eliminated. In such studies, the issue of present racial discrimination is often not considered as it should be.
Few,scholars continue to argue the position that blacks are gen-etically inferior.
Tables 4.4 and 4.5 show that different aspects of SES and family culture influence black and white achievement. Father's education is more important for white student achievement whereas mother's education is more important for black student achievement. Income predicts white student achievement but not black student performance. Parents' educa-tional aspirations predict white students' SPA but social participation is more important for black students.
Since different aspects of SES and family culture predict the achievement of black and white students, it may be more beneficial to examine the significant differences in the aspects of SES and family culture that influence black achievement for Chapter 220 students and resident black students. This has been done throughout this chapter.
TABLE 4.3
REGRESSION OF GPA ON MOTHER'S EDUCATION, FATHER'S EDUCATION, FATHER'S OCCUPATION, INCOME, PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, PARENTS' READING HABITS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL,FAMILY SIZE, AGE, SEX, SUSPENSIONS, EXTRA-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES, PREVIOUS SCHOOL STATUS, AND RACE FOR BLACKS AND WHITES.
B BETA CORREL A1URSQ T
(1) Father did not complete -.708 -.346 -.497 .242 -5.330**
(2) Race (Black) -.720 -.311 -.397 .310 -5.053**
(3) Mother completed at least 412 202 292 361 3.388**
a 4-year degree
(4) Number of suspensions -.461 -.213 -.251 .401 -3.643**
(5) Parents' educational 301 186 161 420 3.081**
aspirations
(6) Family size .101 .136 .103 .443 2.283*
(7) Family income of $50,000 .264 .134 .309 .455 2.187*
or more
(8) Public school attendance -.280 -.132 -.012 .468 -2.158*
N = 160, R2 = .495 ,_
*Significant at .05 level
**Significant at .01 level
TABLE 4.4
REGRESSION OF GPA ON MOTHER'S EDUCATION, FATt{ER'S EDUCATION, FATTIER'S OCCUPATION, INCOME, PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, PARENTS' READING HABITS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, FAMILY SIZE, AGE, SEX, SUSPENSIONS, EXTRA CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES, AND PREVIOUS SCHOOL STATUS FOR WHITES.
B RETA CORREL ArlJR.~1
(1) Father did not complete - 876 -.416 -.508
(2) Number of suspensions - .415 - .206 - .257
(3) Family income of S50,000 .360 - .192 .332
(4) Parents ' educational .293 .203 .255
(5) Family size .118 .170 .146
N = 124, R2 = .405
*Significant at .05 level
**Significant at .01 level
.252 - 5.599**
.291 - 2.875**
.326
.356
.380
2.596*
2.828** 2.370*
TABLE 4.S
REGRESSION OF SPA ON MalllER'S EDUCATION, FATIlER'S EDUCATION, FATHER'S OCCUPATION, INCOME, PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, PARENTS' READING lIABITS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, FAMILY SIZE, ACE, SEX, SUSPENSIONS, EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITES, PREVIOUS SCI100L STATUS, AND CONDITIONS OF ATTENDANCE FOR BLACKS.
B BETA CORREL A~RSQ T
(1) Mother completed at least a .610 .397 .651 .406 3.822**
4-year degree
(2) Parents own home .710 .388 .552 .516 3.765**
(3) Number of suspensions -.597 -.324 -.370 .580 -3.379**
(4) Social participation .229 .279 .417 .642 2.906**
(5) Public school attendance -.407 -.270 -.146 .705 -.2775**
N = 36, R2 = .747
*Significant at .05 level
**Significant at .01 level
172
Summary
The basic propositions that: (1) academic achievement is in-fluenced by socioeconomic status, (2) academic achievement is influ-enced by family culture, (3) academic achievement is influenced by student characteristics, and (4) academic achievement is influenced by race, are generally supported.
Specifically, the hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and mother's education, father's education, income, social participation, parents' educational aspirations, race, suspensions, and private school attendance, were supported.
With the exception of suspensions, these relationships were not supported for whites and blacks. Mother's education is the strongest predictor of achievement for blacks whereas father's education is the strongest predictor of achievement for whites. Income influences white student achievement but not black student achievement. Social participation is positively associated with black student achievement but the family culture variable that influences white student achieve-ment is parents' educational aspirations. Private school attendance is positively associated with the academic achievement of black stu-dents.
The parents of Chapter 220 students may very well have attitudes and values concerning education that are significantly different than those of many blacks. The fact that they chose to send their children to an upper middle class suburban school supports this contention. It
173
may be more accurate to view the black parents in the study in terms of a continuum of class status rather than as two distinct groups.
The two groups of blacks differed significantly in several respects. The self-esteem of resident black partents was significantly higher than that of the parents of Chapter 220 black students. Resident black parents were more interenally controlled and had a higher frequencey of reading books for pleasure.
The academic achievement of white students was significantly higher than that of blacks as a group; however, it was not significantly higher than the achievement of resident black students. The achieve-ment of Chapter 220 black students was significantly lower than that of resident black students.
The hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and father's occupational status, self-esteem, locus of control, PTA meet-ing-.attendance, parents' reading habits, and student involvement in extracurricular activities were not supported.
~ v
FINDINGS LN~ INTERPRETATIONS
174
1
The principal objective of this research was an examination of the role of parental status and behavior on student achievement. More specifically, the investigation concentrated on identifying the aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that influence academic achievement and analyzing the differential aspects of these influences on black and white student performance in an upper middle class majority white school. More about the relevancy of the setting and the circumstances under which most of the black students attend Nicolet will be discussed shortly. The effects of student status and behavioral char-acteristics were also examined. The rationale for selecting two of the student characteristics, participation in extracurricular activities and number of suspensions is that these characteristics can be influ-enced by families. Participation in extracurricular activities involves investments in time and sometimes money. The extent to which students are involved in extracurricular activities also reflects their status within the school. Number of suspensions may reflect parental stress on self-discipline, promptness, and respect for authority.
Generally the findings pertaining to the relationship between
achievement and socioeconomic status are as follows:
(1) white student achievement is positively associated with higher
levels of father's education
(2) white student achievement is positively associated with higher
i
175
family income levels
(3) white student achievement is positively associated with family
size
(4) black student achievement is positively associated with higher
levels of mother's education
(4) black student achievement is positively associated with home
ownership
The findings pertaining to the relationship between parents' education and academic achievement are consistent with Coleman's (1966) conclusion that parents' education has the highest relation to achieve-ment for nearly all groups in later years. The findings are also con-sistent with those of Surname, Maynard, and Ohl (1980). They found that black mothers who completed high school were more successful in helping children acquire cognitive skills. They suggested that since the effects of mother's education greatly exceeded those of father's education, it is likely that the mother's education influences patterns of child care which in turn affects achievement. Family income was not found to be consistently related to black student achievement.
Why do different aspects of SES influence black and white student achievement? The most plausible explanation is that father's education influences income which in turn influences residential patterns. The white students in the study have had access to the better suburban schools.
The findings pertaining to family culture are as follows: (1) parents' educational aspirations are positively associated with
1
176
white student achievement. (2) family size is positively associated with white student achievement. (3) social participation is positively associated with black student achievement.
These findings, with the exception of the one pertaining to family size, are consistent with the literature.
The variables used to represent family culture are more highly correlated for blacks than for whites. If characteristics of families must be significantly related in order to truly represent family culture, then the variables employed were not very representative of family culture for whites. The family characteristics investigated do, how-ever, appear to represent family culture for blacks. Black family culture may be different from that of whites. Although there were no significant differences between black and white self-esteem, locus of control, social participation, and parents reading habits, there is obviously a difference in the relative importance of these variables for black and white student achievement and possibly for status attain-ment. Ogbu (1981) argued that the general failure of efforts to improve the academic performance of black is in part due to the assumptions of social scientists that school performance depends on the home environment, the school environment, and genetic endowment. He further contended that blacks have their own culture with its own child-rearing practices and that schools do not recognize these differences and therefore do not instruct and test in manners consistent with the culture of black children.
177
It is also possible that parents' self-esteem is more important for black student achievement than for white student achievement. The aspects of family culture that influenced black and white student achievement were both most highly correlated with self-esteem. The data suggests that there may be an indirect relationship between academic achievement and parents' self-esteem. Further, locus of control was the strongest predictor of self-esteem for blacks and whites. In light of Coleman's (19663 contentions that: (1) mothers' sense of control may affect childrens' cognitive skills and sense of control, (2) school integration increases minority students sense of control but decreases their self-esteem, and (3) minority student achievement appears closely related to the child's sense of control, the relationship between academic achievement and parents' self-esteem and locus of control in the context of interracial schools should be further examined.
One important conclusion that can be drawn from these findings is that white student achievement appears to be more influenced by income related factors than black student achievement. This conclusion has im-portant policy implications in light of large differences in black and white income. It can be interpreted as an indication that black student achievement can be increased without necessarily increasing black income levels. Caution should be used, however, in policy decisions based on this interpretation. Since money influences
.
178
access to higher education and home ownership, decreasing the income differential between blacks and whites remains important. Another is that black family culture appears to be different from that of whites. This must be taken into consideration if equality in educational °2-portunity is to be attained. Thirdly, different components of SES influence black and white achievement.
These findings and conclusions must be considered in the proper context. The study is limited by the fact that the achievement of students at only one school was investigated. Further, the parents of Chapter 220 students may represent a select group in terms of atti-tudes and values. Thirdly, since the setting of the study was an interracial school, scholars may look at the implications of these findings for interracial schooling, however, increased academic achieve-ment is only one of the possible outcomes of interracial schooling. Improved race relations and exposure to the dominant attitudes and values of American society may also result from interracial schooling.
179
CHAPTER NOTES
CHAPTER I
1. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, "A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration" (1983), p. 1.
2. David J. Armor, "School and Family Effects on Black and White Achievement: A Reexamination of the USOE Data," in Frederick Mosteller and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Gpoortunity (New York: Random House, 1972), p. 17Z.
3. Nancy H. St. John, "Desegregation, Voluntary or Mandatory," Inte-grated Education, Vol. 10, No. 55-60 (1972), pp. 9-10.
4. United States Select Senate Committee on Equal Educational Oppor-tunity, Toward Equality of Educational Opportunity (New York: AMS Press, 1974), p. 25.
5. The aim of voluntary city/suburban plans has not been to attain racial blanace district-wide. Such programs have not been employed as legal remedies to illegal school segregation.
6. W. H. Burton, "Education and Social Class in the United States, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 23, No. 4 (1953), p. 244.
7. Ibid., p. 246.
8. Lloyd W. Warner, Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated' (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944), p. 4377~
9. Ibid., p. 48.
10. Ibid., p. 48.
11. Ibid., p. 248.
12. Edward 8. Tylor, Primitive Culture (New York, publ. unknown, 1889), p. 1.
13. A. L. Kroeber, The Nature of Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952), p. 157.
14. Ibid., p. 132.
15. Ibid., p. 132.
16. Alan B. Wilson, "Residential Segregation of Social Classes and
180
Aspirations of High School Boys," in T. Bentley Edwards and Edward M. Wirt, School Desegregation in the North (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co., 1967), p. 156.
17. Edward C. Banfield, The Unheavenly City (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1970), p. 49.
18. James S. Coleman, et al, Equality of Educational Opportunity (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966), p. 321.
19. Ibid., p. 321.
20. Ruth C Wylie, The Self-Concept (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1979), p. 30.
21. Carl C. Jorgensen, "Internal-External Control in the Academic Achievement of Black Youth: A Re-Appraisal," Integrated Education, Vol. 14, No. 6 (1979), p. 22.
22. Ibid., p. 22.
23. R. B. Burns, The Self Concept (New York: Longman, Inc., 1979), p. 5.
24. Ibid., pp. 7-8.
25. Ibid., p. 9.
26. Morris Rosenberg, Society and the Adolescent Self-Image (Prince-ton: Princeton University Press, 1965), p. 30.
27. Ibid., p. 31.
28. Norris Rosenberg, Conceiving the Self (New York: Basic Books, 1979), P
29. Julian B. Rotter, "External Control and Internal Control," Psy-chologv Today (June 1971), p. 37.
30. Julian B. Rotter, "Generalized Expectancies for Internal Versus External Control," Psychological Monographs, Vol. 80, No. 1 (1971), p. 1.
181
CHAPTER NOTES
CHAPTER II
1. Alan B. Wilson, The Conseauences of
dessary Press, 1969), p. 6. ~
2. Ibid., p. 27.
3. Ibid., p. 28.
ion (Berkeley: Glen-
4. Robert E. Herriott and Nancy H. St. John, Social Class and the Urban School (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1966), p. 7.
5. Ibid., p. 22.
6. Ibid., p. 18.
7. Ibid., p. 47.
8. James S. Coleman (et al), Equality of Educational Opportunity (U.S. Department of Heiith; Education, and Welfare: U.S; Government Printing Office, 1966), p. 305.
9. Ibid., p. 307.
10. Christopher Jencks, Inequality (New York: Basic Books, 1972),
11. Ibid., p. 30.
12. Ibid., pp. 32-33.
13. David K. Cohen, Thomas F. Pettigrew, and Robert T. Riley, '[Race and Outcomes of Schooling," in Frederick Mosteller and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Opportunity (New York: Random House, 1972), p. 345.
14. Ibid., p. 347.
IS. T. Bentley Edwards and Frederick M. Wirt, School Desegregation in the North (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co., 1967], pp. 155-156.
16. Alan B. Wilson, "Residential Segregation of Social Classes and Aspirations of High School Boys," in Edwards and Wirt (eds.), School Desegregation in the North (1959), p. 159.
: ~O on
~ ·~] Ptlicy ~ , No ~ 7.
urban Y M 7dep9 ''Eouca
Vol. ls An Evalu ti Children in
2 (1971), p. 175 ~ Social Pev-~ Sub~
Crain and Mahn-~ tt^--
182
~ - _-~ ~ "~ _rS ! ~lul~y,
ment H -~~ ~ ~ ·~'nara ~ °ndSchoo1 DeS ~ tion and Achieve-An EValuPtionEd~ucpatiln8g DisadVantaged Urb Ch
~ 1eVdi sSCh(s°°1 Intlegg8r3)ion a8nd Its Academic Critics," Civi
Voi 2D8aVi(5d J. Armor, ' e Evid
1972), pp. 1os-l06 USin, The Public Interest
grated Educationusevm ,~hite Students a d
_ _ ~ oi 10 (september, ~ tOberkeln98D3e)segregastion," Inte-
hi W. Mahan, "Changes in Co ni
~ (JanUary-Fenbschool5 on Ign-er-VceitStYle:
25. Ibid., p. 59
26. Ibid., p. 60
, . _V. --=ry lY70), p. 59.
27. ~ . g vfOIStu3d7ents for Equal °Pportu i
8. Ibid., p. 297.
9e yanCy H- St- John ~
'Dhe ~ t197 ~ o~o~l~Desegregation
31t Herman R. Goldberg ~
grated EdUCati°n, Vol. 4 NOP°l2it(aA Pillan~ing for EducatiOn ..
183
32. Ibid., p. 38.
33. Ibid., p. 38.
34. Ibid., p. 38.
35. Ibid., p. 39.
36. Joseph M Samuels, "Busing, Reading, and Self in New Haven," Integrated Education, Vol. 10 (Nov.-Dec., 1972), p. 23.
37. Ibid., p. 26.
38. Ibid., p. 24.
39. Dennis J. Conta, The East Shore District Plan: A City Suburban Merger Proposal by Dennis Conta (Milwaukee: East Shore Committee for OuaIity Education, 1975), p. 2.
40. Miriam G. Palay, Chapter 220: Student Exchanges Between City and Suburb--The Milwaukee Experience (Milwaukee: University of Rlsconsin-Milwaidcee, Urban Observatory, 1Y78), p. 11.
41. William J. Kritek, "Voluntary Desegregation in Wisconsin," Inte-grated Education, Vol. 15, No. 6 (Nov.-Dee. 1977), p. 85.
42. Ibid., p. 85.
43. Adapted from Table 1 in Palay, Chapter 220: Student Exch dig s Between City and Suburb--The Milwaukee Experience, p. 31.
44. Adapted from Tables 3 and 4 in Palay, Chapter 220: Student Ex-changes Between City and Suburb--The Milwaukee Experience, pp. 38-39.
45. Patricia Cayo Sexton, Education and Income (New York: Viking Press, 1961), p. 10.
46. Jencks, Inequality, p. 77.
47. Sexton, Education and Income, p. 11.
48. George Clement Bond, "Social Economic Status and Educational Achievement: A Review Article," Anthropology and Education Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 4 (1981), p. 229.
49. Jencks, Inequality, p. 78.
50. Barbara K. Iverson and Herbert J. Walberg, 'Rome Environment and School Learning: A Quantitative Synthesis," Journal of Experimental
184
_ ucation, Vol. 50, No. 3 (1982), p. 145.
51. Kevin Marjoribanks, "Family Environments," in Herbert J. Walberg (ed.), Educational Environments and Effects (Berkeley: McClutchan Publishing Corp., 1979), p. 17. ~
52. Ibid., p. 18.
53. Iverson and Walberg, "Home Environment and School Learning: A Quantitative Synthesis," p. 145.
54. Ibid., p. 155.
55. Ibid., p. 155.
56. August B. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1949), p. 176.
57. Lloyd W. Warner, Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated? (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944), p. 53.
58. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth, p. 176.
59. Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated?, p. 74.
60. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth, p. 29.
61. Ibid., p. 84.
62. Ibid., p. 88.
63. Ibid., p. 172.
64. Adapted from Table 3.221.3 in Coleman et al, Equality of Educa-tional Opportunity, p. 300.
65. Ibid., p. 301.
66. Arnor, "School and Family Effects on Black and White Achievement: A Reexamination of the USOE Data," p. 172.
67. Ibid., p. 168.
68. Ibid., p. 209.
69. Ibid., pp. 203-204.
70. Ibid., adapted from Table on p. 213.
185
71. Kenneth L. Wilson, "The Effects of Integration and Class on Black Educational Attainment," Sociology of Education, Vol. 52 (April 1979), p. 86.
72. Karl R. White, "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 91, No. 3 (~day 1982), p. 462.
73. Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated?, p. 51.
74. Ibid., p. S2.
75. Sexton, Education and Income, pp. 23-25.
76. Ibid., p. 27.
77. Ibid., p. 151.
78. Ibid., p. 16.
79. George Clement Bond, "Social Economic Status and Educational Achievement: A Review Article," p. 240.
80. Ibid., p. 245.
81. Ibid., p. 253.
82. Karl R. White, "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement," p. 463.
83. Ibid., p. 464.
84. Ibid., p. 464.
85. Ibid., pp. 465-466.
86. Ibid., p. 474.
87. Ibid., p. 475.
88. Ibid., p. 475.
89. Thomas Kellaghan, "Relationships Between Home Environment and Scholastic Behavior in a Disadvantaged Population," Journal of Edu-cational Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 6 (1977), p. 754.
90. George Clement Bond, "Social Economic Status and Educational Achievement: A Review Article," p. 242.
186
91. Charles A. Valentine, "The Culture of Poverty: Its Scientific Significance and Its Implications for Action," in Eleanor Leacock (ed.), The Culture of Poverty: A Critique (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971), p. 132.
92. Ibid., p. 207.
93. Ibid., p. 207.
94. Ibid., p. 207.
95. Ibid., p. 211.
96. White, "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Aca-demic Achievement," p. 463.
97. Kellaghan, "Relationships Between Home Environment and Scholastic Behavior in a Disadvantaged Population," p. 756.
98. Zena Smith Blau, Black Children/White Children (New York: The Free Press, 1981), p. 96.
99. Ibid., p. 98.
100. Ibid., p. 98.
101. Ibid., p. 85.
187
CHAPTER NOTES
CHAPTER III
1. Theodore V. Montgomery, Jr., School Desegreation Planning, Mil-waukee 1976 Chronology, Plans, and Participants (Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1~9, p. 590.
2. Ibid., p. 593.
3. Pamela J. Sampson, Ontions: School Desegregation Milwaukee: Uni-versity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1976), p. 61.
4. Ibid., p. 61.
5. Ibid., p. 61.
6. Ibid., p. 54.
7. Montgomery, Jr., "School Desegregation Planning, Milwaukee 1976 Chronology, Plans, and Participants," p. 375.
8. Ibid., p. 375.
9. Ibid., p. 376.
10. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration (Milwaukee, 1983), p.
11. Letter to the Milwaukee Board of School Directors, October 26, 1983.
12. Office of the Superintendent of Schools, letter to the Milwaukee Board of School Directors, October 26, 1983, p. 1.
13. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration, p. 1.
14. Ibid., p. 6.
15. Ibid., p. 6.
16. Ibid., p. 7.
17. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, May 10, 1984, proposal to suburban districts, p. 3.
18. Ibid., p. 4.
188
19. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, "The Suburban/ Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Positive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities for Milwaukee and Suburban Students" clay 31, 1984), p. 3.
20. United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, Suit filed by the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee (June 28, 1984), p. 8.
21. Ibid., p. 2.
22. Ibid., p. 2.
23. Ibid., pp. 11-12.
24. Ibid., p. 17.
Ibid., p. 20.
26. The Shorewood School District has been involved in a number of student exchange programs including A Better Chance (ABC) and American Field Service International (AFS). Under the ABC program, minority students lived with families in the area and attended Shorewood High School. AFS is an international exchange program.
27. The means and standard deviations for this variable were computed utilizing the original categories with the exception of (9) other--please specify.
28. The means and standard deviations for this variable were computed utilizing the original categories with the exception of (9) other--please specify.
29. In order to interpret the means for this variable, one should look at the North-Hatt occupational prestige index. A score of 66, for ex-ample, generally indicates that an individual is employed in a profes-sional occupation. The NORC score for college professors is 82.
30. The means and standard deviations for this variable were computed utilizing the original categories.
31. Norman H. Nie and C. Handlai Hull, SPSS Update 7-9 (New York: McGraw-Hill Publishers, 1981), p. 249.
189
GlUPTER NOTES
CHAPTER TV
1. August B. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth (New York. Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1949), p. 187.
190
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Armor, David J. "The Evidence on Busing," The Public Interest, Vol. 28, No. 90 (Summer, 1972): 91-126.
. "School and Family Effects on Black and White Achievement," in Frederick Mosteller and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Opportunity. New York: Random House, 1972.
Banfield, Edward C. The Unheavenly City. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1970.
Battle, Ester S. and Julian B. Rotter. "Children's Feelings of Per-sonal Control as Related to Social Class and Ethnic Group," Journal of Personality, Vol. 31 (1963): 482-490.
Bernstein, Basil. "Social Class and Linguistic Development: A Theory of Social Learning," in A. H. Halsey, I. Floud, and C. A. Anderson (eds.), Education, Economy and Society, 1961.
Blau, Zena Smith. Black Children/White Children. New York: The Free Press, 1981.
Bloom, B. S. Stability and Change in Human Characteristics. New York: Wiley, 1964. ~
Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee. A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1983.
Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee. The Suburban/ Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Posi-tive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities For Milwaukee and Suburban Students. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1984.
Bond, George Clement. "Social Economic Status and Educational Achieve-ment: A Review Article," Anthropology and Education Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 4 (1981): 227-257.
Bossard, James H. S., and Eleanor Stokes Boll. The Sociology of Child Development. New York: Harper and Row, 1966.
Bradley, Lawrence A., and Gifford W. Bradley. "The Academic Achievement of Black Students in Desegregated Schools: A Critical Review," Review of Educational Research, Vol. 47, No. 3 (1977): 399-449.
Burns, R. B. The Self-Concept. New York: Longman, Inc., 1979.
191
Burton, W. H. "Education and Social Class in the United States," Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 23, No. 2 (1953): 543-551.
Claeys, Willem and Paul De Boeck. "The Influence of Some Parental Characteristics on Children's Primary Abilities and Field Inde-pendence: A Study of Adopted Children," Child Development, Vol. 47 (1976): 842-845.
Cohen, David K., Thomas F. Pettigrew, and Robert T. Riley. "Race and Outcomes of Schooling," in Frederick losteller and Daniel P. t10ynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Opportunity. New York: Random House, l§72.
Coleman, James S. et al. The Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, Din.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Conta, Dennis J. The East Shore District Plan: A City-Suburban Merger Proposal by Dennis Conta. Milwaukee: East Shore Committee for Quality Education, 1975.
Coopersmith, Stanley. The Antecedents of Self-Esteem. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1967.
Cox, Oliver C. Caste, Class and Race. New York: Doubleday, 1948.
Crain, Robert L. and Rita E. Mayhard. "Desegregation and Black Achieve-ment: A Review of the Research," Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 42, too. 3 (1978): 17-56.
. "Research on School Desegrega-tion and Achievement: How to Combine Scholarship and Policy Relevance," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 4 (July-August, 1979).
Dave, William I., and E. Jerry Phares. "Parental Antecedents of In-ternal Control of R Enforcement," Psychological Reports, Vol. 24 (1969): 427-436.
Davis, Allison. Social Class Influences on Learning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1948.
Dolan, Lawrence J. "Home, School and Pupil Attitudes," Evaluation in Education: An International Review Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (1980): 267-358.
Bunnell, J. P. Input and Output Analysis of Suburban Elementary School Districts. Association Meetings, New York, February, 1971.
192
Edwards, T. Bentley and Frederick M. Wirt. School Desegregation in the North. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co.,--1967.
Epps, Edgar. "The Impact of School Desegregation on Aspirations, Self-Concept, and Other Aspects of Personality," Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 39, No. 2 (Spring, 1975):300-313.
Fisher, Sethard. "Race, Class, Anomie, and Academic Achievement: A Study at the High School Level," Urban Education, Vol. 16, No. 2 (July, l9Sl):149-173.
Gibson, Jesse. "Affective Parent Education in Philadelphia." United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Institute of Education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Print-ing Office, 1978.
Gigliotti, Richard J. "Residential Stability and Academic Sense of Control," Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 6, No. 3 Ddarch, 1976):
Goldberg, Herman R. 'metropolitan Plannung for Integration," Integrated Education, Vol. 4, No. 2 (April-May, 1966):36-42.
Good, Suzanne. "Parental Antecedents of Children's Internal Control of Reinforcements in Intellectual Achievement Situations," Child Development, Vol. 38, No. 3 (1967):765-776.
Gordon, Vivian Verdell. The Self-Concept of Black Americans. Landham: University Press of America, Inc., 1980.
Gurin, Patricia, Gerald Gurin, Rosina C. Lao, and Muriel Beattie. "Internal External Control in the Motivational Dynamics of Negro Youth," Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 25 (1969):29-53.
Havighurst, Robert J. and Daniel Levine. Society and Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1979.
Herriott, Robert E. and Nancy Hoyt St. John. Social Class and the Urban School. New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966.
Hollingshead, August B. Elmtown's Youth. New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1949.
Hull, C. Hadlai and Norman H. Nie. SPSS Update 7-9. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishers, 1981.
193
Iverson, Barbara K. and Herbert J. Walberg. "Home Environment and School Learning: A Quantitative Synthesis," Journal of Experi-mental Education, Vol. 50, No. 3 (Spring, 1982): 144-151.
Jencks, Christopher. Inequality. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1972.
Jorgensen, Carl C. "Internal-External Control in the Academic Achieve-ment of Black Youth: A Re-Appraisal," Integrated Education, Vol 14, No. 6 (November-December 1976): 20-23.
Katz, Irwin. "The Socialization of Academic Motivation in Minority Group Children," in David Levine (ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967.
Reeves, John P. "Educational Environment and Student Achievement," in Kevin Marjoribanks (ed.), Environments for Learning. Windsor, Berks: NFER Publishing Co., 1972.
Kellaghan, Thomas. "Relationships Between Home Environment and Schol-astic Behavior in a Disadvantaged Population," Journal of Educa-tional Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 6 (1977): 754-760.
Kohn, Melvin L. Class and Conformity: A Studv in Values. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Press, 1969.
Kritek, William J. "Voluntary Desegregation in Wisconsin," Integrated Education, Vol. 15, No. 6 (Nov.-Dee. 1977): 83-87.
Kroeber, A. L. The Nature of Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952.
Leacock, Eleanor Burke (ed.). The Culture of Poverty. New York: Simon and Shuster, 1971.
Lesser, Gerald, Gordon Fifer, and Donald H. Clark. '[dental Abilities of Children from Different Social Class and Cultural Groups," Fionographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Vol. 30, No. 4 (1965). ~
Lewis, Oscar. "The Culture of Poverty," Scientific American, Vol. 215 (1966): 19-25.
Mahan, Aline M. and Thomas W. Mahan. "Changes in Cognitive Style: An Analysis of the Impact of White Suburban Schools on Inner C ty Children," Integrated Education (January-F bruary, 1970): 58-61.
.
Mahan, Thomas W. 'rOhe Busing of Students for Equal Opportunities," Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 37, No. 3 (1968): 291-300.
194
and Aline M. Mahan. "The Impact of Schools on Learning: Inner-City Children in Suburban Schools," Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1971): 1-11.
Malone, Pamela J. "Race, Class, and School Desegregation." Paper presented at the Midwest Sociological Society Annual Meetings, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, April 3-8, 1980.
Marjoribanks, Kevin. "Academic Achievement: Family Size and Social Class," in Kevin Marjoribanks (ed.), Environments for Learning. Windsor, Berks: NFER Publishing Co., 1974.
. Environments for Learning. Windsor, Berks: NFER Publishing Co., 1974.
. Ethnic Families and Children's Achievement. Sidney: George Allen and Unwin Publishers, 1980.
. "Family Environments," in Herbert Walberg (ed.), Educational Environments and Effects. Berkeley: McCutchan Pub-lishing Corp., 1979.
McAdoo, Harriet Pipes (ed.). Black Families. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
. "Components of Educational Achievement and Mobility in Black Families." Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association [ketings, New York, New York, April 3-8, 1977.
McDonald, A. P., Jr. "Internal-External Locus of Control: Parental Antecedents," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 37, No. 1 (1971): 141-147.
Montgomery, Theodore V., Jr. School Desegregation Planning, Milwaukee 1976 ChronologY, Plans, and Participants. Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1979.
Miller, Delbert. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. (3rd ed.). New York: David McKay Company, 1977.
Mosteller, Frederick and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.). On Equality of Educational Opportunity. New York: Random House, 1972.
Murname, Richard J., Rebecca A. Maynard, and James C. Olds. "Home Re-sources and Children's Achievement," Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 63, No. 3 (August 1981): 369-76.
Murphy, Frank. Interview based on unpublished paper submitted for graduate course work at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (1983)
195
The National Commission on Excellence in Education. A Nation at Risk. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983.
Orfield, Gary. "School Integration and Its Academic Critics," Civil Rights Digest, Vol. 5 (Summer 1983): 2-10.
Palay, Miriam G. Chapter 220, Student Exchanges Between City and Sub-urb--The Milwaukee Experience. Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1978.
Rose, Harold M. Black Suburbanization. Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing Company, 1976.
Rossi, Peter H. "Social Factors in Academic Achievement: A Brief Review," in A. H. Halsey, I. Floud, and C. Anderson (ads.), Edu-cation, Economy and Society. New York: Free Press, 1961.
, William A. Sampson and Christine E. Bose, et al. "Measuring Household Social Standing," Social Science~kesearch, Vol. 3 (1974): 169-190.
Rotter, Julian B. "Generalized Expectancies for Internal vs. External Control of Reinforcement," Psychological Monographs, Vol. 80, No. 1 (1966): 1-28.
. "External and Internal Control," Psychology Today, Vol. 5, No. 1 (June 1971): 37-59.
Rosenberg, Morris. Occupations and Values. Glencoe: The Free Press, 1957.
. Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton: - Princeton University Press, 1965.
York: Basic Books, Inc., 1979.
and Roberta G. Simmons. Black and White Self-Esteem: The Urban School Child. Washington, D.C.: American Sociolotical Association, i971.
Conceiving the Self. New
and Leonard I. Pearlin. "Social Class and SelfEsteem Among Children and Adults," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 84, No. 1 (1978): 53-77.
Sampson, Pamela J. Options: School Desegregation. Milwaukee: Uni-
versity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1976.
196
Sampson, William A. and Ben Williams. "School Desegregation: The Non-Traditional Sociological Perspective," Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Winter, 1978): 72-87.
Samuels, Joseph. "Busing, Reading, s d Self in New Haven," Integrated Education, Vol. 10 (November-December 1972): 23-28.
Seginer, Rachel. "Parents' Educational Expectations s d Children's Academic Achievement" A Literature Review," Merrill-Palmer Quar-terly, Vol. 29, No. 1 (1983): 1-23.
Sexton, Patricia Cayo. Education and Income. New York: The Viking Press, 1961. ~
Slaughter, Diana T. "The Relationship of Early Parent-Teacher Sociali-zation Influences to Achievement Orientation and Self-Esteem in Middle Childhood Among Low Income Black Children." Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development Biennial Meetings, Denver, Colorado, April 10-13, 1975.
Sowell, Thomas. Race and Economics. New York: Longman Publ., 1975.
St. John, Nancy H. "Desegregation, Voluntary or Mandatory," Integrated Education, Vol. 10, No. 55-60 (1972): 7-16.
. "The Elementary Classroom as a Frog Pond: SelfConcept, Sense of Control, and Social Context," Social Forces, Vol. 49, No. 4 (June 1971): 581-595.
.
School Desegregation: Outcomes for Children. New
York: Wiley and Sons, 1975.
Tylor, Edward B. Primitive Culture. 1889 (publ. unknown).
United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin. Suit filed by the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, 1984.
United States Select Senate Committee on Equal Educational Opportunity. Toward Equal Educational Opportunity. New York: AMS Press, Inc.,
Useem, Elizabeth. 'Lucite Students and Token Desegregation," Integrated Education, Vol. 10 (September-October 1983): 46-54.
Valentine, Charles A. "The Culture of Poverty: Its Scientific Sig-nificance and Its Implications for Action," in Eleanor Leacock (ed.), The Culture of P~verty3~]ag]5~. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971.
197
Walberg, Herbert J. (ed.). Educational Environments and Effects. Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing Corp., 1979.
and Kevin Marjoribanks. "Family Environment and Cognitive Development," Review of Educational Research, Vol. 46, No. 4 (1976): 527-555. ~
Warner, Lloyd W., Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb. Who Shall Be Educated? New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944.
Weinberg, Meyer. "The Relationship Between School Desegregation and Academic Achievement: A Review of the Research," Law and Contem-porary Problems, Vol. 39, No. 2 (1975): 241-278.
White, Karl R. "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 91, No. 3 (May 1982): 461-481.
Wilson, Alan B. The Consequences of Segregation: Academic Achievement in a Northern Community. Berkeley: Glendary Press, 1969.
. "Residential Segregation of Social Classes and Aspirations of High School Boys," in T. Bentley Edwards and Frederick M. Wirt (ads.), School Desegregation in the North. San Francisco Chandler Publishing Co., 1959.
Wilson, Kenneth L. "The Effects of Integration and Class on Black Edu-cational Attainment," Sociology of Education, Vol. 52 (April 1979):
Wilson, William J. The Declining Significance of Race. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.
Wylie, Ruth C. The Self-Concept (Volume 2). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1979.
Zdep, Stanley M. "Educating Disadvantaged Urban Children in Suburban Schools: An Evaluation," Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 2 (1971): 173-186.
VITA (Ph.D.)
TITLE OF THESIS: Socioeconomic Status, Family Culture, and Academic
Achievement: A Study of Black and White Pupil
Performance at an Interracial School
FULL NAME: Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
PLACE AND DATE OF BIRTH: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, February 17, 1953
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
YEARS ATTENDED AND DEGREES:
Lakeland College, 1970-1974, Bachelor of Arts
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 1975-1976,
Master of Science
PUBLICATIONS: Options: School Desegregation. Milwaukee Urban
Observatory, UWM (1976)
MAJOR DEPARTMENT: Urban Social Institutions
SPECIALIZATION: Race and Ethnicity
DATE:
SIGNED: P fies in charge f he
0 t 515
h~ fJ 1995
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL
by
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
A Thesis Submitted in partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Urban Social Institutions
at
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
May 1985
Major Professor
Dr. Harold M. Rose
5/8 /85
Date
Graduate School Approval
Date
http://leontodd.blogspot.com/2010/12/chapter-220-milwaukee-inter-district.html
E-mail:
Part #3
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL by:
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
Web site:
E-mail:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, (1985)
Under the Supervision of
Dr. Harold M. Rose
page 104
Assistance Program and Emergency School Act to aid desegregation efforts were used to implement a variety of programs including in-service programs for professional and non-professional staff, community relations programs, curriculum development, research and evaluation, and Latino student needs programs.5 These programs were not in operation prior to desegregation and would have been difficult if not impossible to establish without these funds. In Boston, Massachusetts, colleges, universities, and businesses assisted public schools as part of the desegregation effort. New programs of instruction were implemented and existing ones were strengthened. Brandeis Uhiversity worked with the citywide magnet English High School and Harvard professors worked with the staff and students of Roxbury High School. It seemed that in many districts, educational quality improved as a result of desegregation.
A second observation pertained to social class, but not in the same context as in this research. Several of the studies examined the relationship between social class and acceptance of interracial schooling. Middle and upper class whites seemed to hold more liberal attitudes towards desegregation than did lower class whites. It seemed logical that if upper and middle class whites had what could be considered a "healthy" attitude towards interracial contact in the schools, their general attitudes were most likely conducive to other forms of social and individual progress. On the other hand, the rejection of the idea of interracial schooling by many lower class whites was
c_
undoubtedly a reflection of their general attitudes concerning race relations. The manner in which the general attitudes of various social classes were reflected in interracial schooling situations seemed worth investigating.
Community response to desegregation efforts was an important factor in the success or failure of interracial schooling. As was the case in Boston, Massachusetts, reactions to desegregation were often negative if not violent. The thought occurred that if black children attended schools with white students whose parents had a liberal attitude towards racial interaction, black and white students would be more likely to derive cultural and academic benefits from the experience. Voluntary city/suburban transfer programs, including Project Concern in Hartford, Connecticut, and METoO were examined in an attempt to determine whether community response was less hostile when interracial schooling was voluntarily achieved.
It became obvious that if equality in educational opportunity was to become more than just a topic of conversation engaged in by propo-nents of a liberal ideology, the relationships between interracial schooling, school social class, socioeconomic status, and family cul-ture should be examined.
The Chapter 220 program, which began in the 1976-1977 school year, provided an excellent opportunity to examine these and related relation-ships in upper and middle class majority white suburban schools.
.
104
Assistance Program and Emergency School Act to aid desegregation ef-forts were used to implement a variety of programs including in-service programs for professional and non-professional staff, community rela-tions programs, curriculum development, research and evaluation, and Latino student needs programs.5 These programs were not in operation prior to desegregation and would have been difficult if not impossible to establish without these funds. In Boston, Massachusetts, colleges, universities, and businesses assisted public schools as part of the desegregation effort. New programs of instruction were implemented and existing ones were strengthened. Brandeis Uhiversity worked with the citywide magnet English High School and Harvard professors worked with the staff and students of Roxbury High School. It seemed that in many districts, educational quality improved as a result of de-segregation.
A second observation pertained to social class, but not in the same context as in this research. Several of the studies examined the relationship between social class and acceptance of interracial school-ing. Middle and upper class whites seemed to hold more liberal atti-tudes towards desegregation than did lower class whites. It seemed logical that if upper and middle class whites had what could be con-sidered a "healthy" attitude towards interracial contact in the schools, their general attitudes were most likely conducive to other forms of social and individual progress. On the other hand, the rejection of the idea of interracial schooling by many lower class whites was
106
METROPOLITAN DESEGREGATION
1
It is rare for investigations of social phenomena to take place in a social, political, or economic vacuum. The phenomena or situa-tions sought to be explained must be evaluated in their proper context. This holds true for the present investigation.
The possibility of implementing ametropolitan desegregation plan has been considered in Milwaukee for over 10 years. The Conta Plan, which was discussed in Chapter II, was the first attempt to secure sup-port for a metropolitan approach to desegregation in the state of Wis-consin.7 In flay of 1975, the City Attorney supported a metropolitan solution to desegregation.8 Other individuals and organizations supported metropolitan desegregation as well. In November 1975, the Coalition for Quality Education held a conference to explore metropolitan alternatives to integration. On November 23, 1975, then State Representative Lloyd Barbee introduced Assembly Bill 1248 (AB 1248) which would require each school district in the state to develop a plan to 'prevent, eliminate or reduce excessive racial imbalance."9 In 1979, Judge Reynolds stated that "for the purpose of achieving the most effective remedy ... it would certainly make sense to include metropolitan Milwaukee school districts within the remedy for the City of Milwaukee public school
system. tt10
On August 31, 1982, the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee proposed a study of alternate educational solutions that would provide the maximum instructional and financial resources while
107
ensuring a multi-cultural educational setting for every child. The Board authorized the Administration to engage legal counsel to consider the merits of the Board's possible participation in litigation to in-tegrate housing and public education in the Milwaukee metropolitan area.ll
On October 26, 1983, the Superintendent of Schools informed the
Board that based on the evidence gathered, there is reason to believe
that a suit could be successfully pursued and that if such a suit were
pursued, the Board should take the initiative because serving the best
interests of Milwaukee's school children is the Board's responsibility.
The Superintendent recommended that:
(1) the Board adopt a proposal to increase metropolitan school inte-
gration and authorize the President to formally submit the proposal
on behalf of the Board to the designated area school boards for their
consideration and action, such action to occur on or before December
15, 1983;
(2) the Board adopt a statement endorsing the concept of an inte-
grated metropolitan school system;
(3) the Board adopt a resolution which was drafted by attorneys at
the request of the Board and which authorizes them to prepare the
necessary documents to initiate litigation to integrate public edu-
cation in the metropolitan area.l2
"A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration," states that while the Board has faithfully attempted to implement its desegregation plan since 1976, there are still public schools in
108
Milwaukee with a black student population of over 80% and that demographic projections indicate that racial isolation of Milwaukee students may very well increase.
As we enter the final year of the desegregation plan, the Mil-waukee Board remains committed to the achievement of complete and stable school desegregation. It is clear, however, that further desegregation progress requires the increased involvement of suburban school districts throughout the metropolitan area.l3
The Board contended that the creation of a metropolitan school system is the most efficient and effective means of achieving full desegregation and equal opportunity. Consolidating area school dis-tricts into one or more school districts serving both the city and suburbs, the Board argued, would not only result in increased racial balance, but also substantial savings to the metropolotian taxpayers. The Milwaukee Board also stated that it would be willing to join with the suburban school districts in an effort to voluntarily increase the level of inter-district exchange through the existing Chapter 220 program. It was made clear that should suburban districts reject what the Board considered a modest proposal, other units of govern-ment, and if necessary, the federal courts, would be approached in order to seek redress for discriminatory action in education and housing in order to fulfill its obligation to the students and citi-zens of Milwauke..
In October of 1983, the Milwaukee Board of School Directors
109
contacted the school board presidents of 24 suburban districts re-
questing their assistance in providing a quality education for both
black and white students in the metropolitan area.
TABLE 3.1
SDEt£R~AN DISTRICTS CONTACTED BY THE MILWAUKEE SCHOOL BOARD
Brown Deer
Cudahy
Elmbrook
Fox Point/Bayside
Franklin
Germantown
Glendale
Greendale
Greenfield
Hamilton-Sussex
Menomonee Falls
Mequon/Thiensville
Mus ke go /Norway
New Berlin
Nicolet
Oak Creek/Franklin
St. Francis
Shorewood
South Milwaukee
Waukesha
Wanwatosa
West Allis/West Milwaukee
Whitefish Bay
Whitnall/Hales Corners
While the Board did not suggest a specific plan for the accomplish-
ment of this goal, its position on metropolitan desegregation was clearly
set forth:
The Milwaukee Board of School Directors believes it is in the long-tenm best interests of the metropolitan area that we have a metropolitan school system. Our interest in ad-vocating this arrangement is engendered not only by our commitment to metropolitan integration, but also because of our belief that a metropolitan school system could serve all area citizens more effectively and efficiently. We believe that higher quality programs and greater tax effi-ciencies can be realized without loss of cherished local control. As individuals have an opportunity to fairly assess the advantages of a metropolitan school system, we believe that they will conclude, a,4we have concluded, that such a system should be adopted.
The Board concurred with the conclusions of the Task Force on Educa-
tion of the Goals Greater Milwaukee/2000 project that the "Chapter 220 program appears to have reached a plateau,''l5 and that new
110
initiatives are necessary to ensure equal access to educational op-portunities for all students in the metropolitan area. The Board acknowledged that the voluntary student exchange program between the Milwaukee Public Schools and suburban districts within Milwaukee County has resulted in positive individual and social benefits, but only to a limited degree because of the small number of students involved. From 1978-1979 to 1981-1982, black enrollment in suburban districts in Milwaukee County has only increased from 2.2 percent to 3 percent. Minority enrollment in suburban schools would have been only 1.1 per-cent had there been no Chapter 220 program.
While interest in the suggestions of suburban administrators and staff for improving the proposal was expressed, the Board firmly stated that there can be no misunderstanding about its attitude to-wards the proposal. The proposal "represents the most modest, accept-able goal and timeline for increasing metropolitan integration. Any response to this proposal that suggests fewer students involved in an exchange program, or a longer ti~meline for implementation, would be viewed as diminishing the proposal, not strengthening it.''l6 The Board further stated that it recognized that the suburban districts would require time to study the proposal and go through the necessary in-volvement processes to determine their responses. The decisions of the suburban districts were requested by December 15, 1983.
The suburban districts were informed that several law firms had been retained and that attorneys had concluded that a metro-
111
politan law suit could be successfully pursued.
On February 3, 1984, "The Suburban/Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Positive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities for Milwaukee and Suburban Students" was drafted and subsequently submitted to the Milwaukee Board of School Directors. Upon consideration of the October 31, 1983 proposal sent to the suburban districts and the suburbs' responses, on May 11, 1984, the Board submitted a proposal to the suburbs outlining the overall goals to be achieved, conditions of the agreement, and a recommended timetable for implementation. The goals were: (1) to achieve a high level of quality educational programs for students in the Milwaukee area. (2) to avoid resegregation of the Milwaukee Public Schools and to maintain a racial balance in the city school district of 45% black, 45% white, and 10% others. By the fall of 1985, this goal will be 50% accomplished and fully accomplished by the fall of 1986. (3) to provide equal nondiscriminatory access to schools in the Milwaukee area to minority students and staff. (4) to increase the achievement of all students and to narrow the gap between the average achievement of minority and majority students as measured by standardized tests, number and percent graduating from high school, number and percent going on to institutions of higher learning, and the number and percent of students receiving full-time employment for which they have been specifically trained.
112
(5) to adhere to the principle of equality in establishing specific
goals between the participating suburban districts and the Milwaukee
Public Schools.
(6) to enhance the integration of the schools and the total community
through a comprehensive human relations program.
(7) to increase minority staff representation in the suburbs and to
increase affirmative employment of minorities in the Milwaukee Public
Schools.
(8) to receive support from the State of Wisconsin which will provide
the financial resources and the facilitating legislation.l7
The following conditions were set forth by the Board:
1. Agreements shall be made between the Milwaukee Public Schools and those school districts contiguous to the City-of Milwaukee and County.
2. Voluntary means shall be used to achieve the goals, but the timetable and goals of the plan must be met by the participating districts over the next three school years.
3. The present Chapter 220 proce & res which provide for individual planning councils will be utilized to establish contractual agreements between participating suburban school districts and the Milwaukee Public Schools.
4. The planning and implementation process will be enhanced by the development of a representative congress of parents and teachers from each participating school district with proportional representatives from the Milwaukee Public Schools. The racial makeup of the Milwaukee Public Schools' delegates to the congress will be re-presentative of the student population.
5. In order to coordinate the activities among the school districts an Interdistrict Coordinating Committee shall be formed consisting of the Superintendents, the Board Presidents, and a proportional number of representatives from the congress, with adequate representation of minorities.
113
6. A monitoring and evaluation process shall be put into effect by the representative congress as one of its functions.
7. The representative congress of parents and teachers would encourage suburban transfer students to transfer to schools in the Milwaukee school system other than just specialty schools.l8
On May 31, 1984, a revised version of "The Suburban/Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Positive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities for Milwaukee and Suburban Students" was drafted. The revised version, like the original, made no mention of the creation of a metropolitan school district. The sub-urbs continued to support voluntary participation in the plan and working through the existing Chapter 220 program.
Annual goal setting and evaluation will be done through each school district's Chapter 220 planning councils with approval of the board of education. Each board of education will adopt its own set of percentage or numerical goals for volun-tary suburban and city transfers of students. Each school district will then invidivually work toward the achievement of its goal. Planning councils will also serve as a means to explore and develop other methods of increasing voluntary participation in the Chapter 220 program. At no time will a student ever be assigned to attend school in another school district in an effort to meet the voluntary goals of a dis-trict planning council.l9
On May 11, 1984, Milwaukee school superintendent McMurrin con-tacted the suburban districts in regard to their response to the Mil-waukee Board's proposal for increasing inter-district integration. Between May 29 and June 19, twenty-four suburban districts wrote letters to the Milwaukee School Board. The Nicolet High School Dis-trict, the third district to respond, did so on June 6, 1984. Brown
114
Deer responded on June 7. Twelve of the 24 districts, including Brown Deer, supported the revised version of the suburban/Milwaukee Plan for cooperation etween school districts. Nicolet did not sup-port the plan. Twelve districts, including Brown Deer and Nicolet, indicated a willingness to work with M.P.S. when M.P.S. approved their suburban/Milwaukee plan. Brown Deer, Nicolet, and ten other districts wanted voluntary participation only. Both Nicolet and Brown Deer stated that they lacked the legal authority to compel nonvoluntary transfers. Nicolet expressed a desire to work through the existing Chapter 220 program.
On June 28, 1984, the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee filed suit with the United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin. The state and regional defendants named in the complaint were: (1) the State of Wisconsin, (2) Anthony S. Earl in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Wisconsin, (3) Herbert S. Grover in his official capacity as State Superintendent of the Department of Public Instruction, (4) the Agency School Com-mittee of the Cooperative Educational Service Agency (CESA) 19, (5) Virginia Stolhand in her official capacity as president of the Agency School Commuttee (ASC) of CESA 19, (6) CESA 19, (7) William D. Bergum in his official capacity as executive administrator of CESA 19, and (8) Paule Kolff in her official capacity as chairperson of the CESA 19 Board of Control. These defendants have ultimate respon-sibility for public education in Wisconsin which includes insuring that federal and State laws requiring nondiscrimination in public
education are upheld, providing financial support to local school districts, and conducting and supervising school district reorgani-zation and other interdistrict activities in the Milwaukee area.20
The school districts listed in Table 3.1 were named as sub-urban defendants.
The Board requested declaratory and injunctive relief to redress the deprivation under color of state law of the rights, priviliges, and immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of Wisconsin to the plaintiff and the school-children of Milwaukee. It sought to remedy the illegal racial segre-gation and the resulting inequality in educational opportunity and the metropolitan-wide racially dual structure of education created and maintained by defendants in the Milwaukee metropolitan area.21
The complaint alleged that the defendants and their predecessors have cooperated in a continuing series of actions and refusals to act with respect to education and housing which has intentionally and ef-fectively isolated Milwaukee area black students within the city of Milwaukee.22 Actions by defendants included excluding Milwaukee from, and otherwise impeding, interdistrict school reorganization efforts; refusing to permit significant numbers of black students from the city to attend suburban schools despite the availability of financial subsidies and the excess capacity of suburban schools; vio-lating specific affirmative obligations under state law to undertake
116
reorganization to promote equal educational opportunity and rejecting proposals which would have such a desegregation effect; and rein-forcing governmental action promoting residential segregation which has contributed to the creation and maintenance of segregated schools.
The Board further alleged that from 1947 to 1965, defendants and their predecessors intentionally excluded Milwaukee from interdistrict school reorganization activities undertaken under the auspices of County School Committees in Wisconsin. The rejection of a 1950 re-organization plan recommended by the Milwaukee County School Committee which would have consolidated the 67 school districts then existing in Milwaukee County into 7 districts, involved significant consolida-tion between Milwaukee and surrounding areas, and increased integration, was cited as evidence against the defendants. During the 1950's and 1960's, a pattern of school district reorganization took place which excluded and produced the fragmented structure of 18 school districts that presently exist in Milwaukee County. As a result of this and other actions by the defendants, Milwaukee has become a separate, heavily black district while the suburbs are overwhelmingly white. The effects of the defendants' actions were foreseeable, argued the Board, and both helped create and reinforce segregated conditions in
the Milwaukee area.
The suburban school
districts were also cited for engaging in discriminatory practices. One of these practices pertains to the Chapter 220 program. The Board argued that the suburban defendants.
23
117
despite excess capacity in suburban schools and the availability of financial subsidies, have severely limited participation in Chapter 220 in a number of ways. Among them are: (1) prohibiting black students from attending suburban schools, (2) imposing arbitrary quotas on the number of black students allowed to participate in the program, (3) prohibiting black students from Milwaukee from attending regular programs and confining them to summer or special programs, and (4) refusing to take effective steps to encourage suburban white student participation in the program. The complaint also stated that the maintenance of racially identifiable schools and discrimination in faculty and administrative hiring by the suburban school district defendants has intentionally reinforced and perpetuated the segregated conditions throughout the Milwaukee area.24
Concerning the issue of discrimination in fair housing practices, the Board alleged that Milwaukee area government agencies created by the State of Wisconsin have engaged in segregative subsidized housing practices with the effect and purpose of restricting blacks to segre-gated areas within the City of Milwaukee, thereby contributing to and reinforcing school segregation. It was further stated that the federally-assisted Section 8 rent assistance program has been operated in a racially discriminatory manner. Black Milwaukee residents who ob-tain rent assistance subsidy certificates in the city are precluded from using them outside of city boundaries. Even though black Mil-waukee residents can theoretically obtain certificates from the
118
Milwaukee County Section 8 program, rent subsidies outside the city have been granted almost exclusively to whites.25
The legal and political battles over the issue of metropolitan desegregation in the Milwaukee area have not ended. The NAACP and other organizations are considering intervening in the legal action as plaintiffs.
BROWN DEER
The present investigation began in the late fall of 1980. Sev-eral factors, including the number of Chapter 220 students attending schools in each of the participating school districts, the size of the resident black student populations in each district, and median income levels of families in given suburbs, were taken into consideration in selecting the suburban district in which the study was to take place.
The Brown Deer School District was selected. Brown Deer, a sub-urb located north of the city of Milwaukee, had a total population of 12,921 in 1980, of which about 741 or 5.7' was black. The median family income was $28,957. Nearly 2,856 students were enrolled in district schools. Approximately 103 of the district's students were black. About half of black students attended under the Chapter 220 program.
Between February and April of 1981, a number of telephone con-versations were held with Brown Deer officials regarding the possi-bility of conducting research on factors related to the academic
119
performance of black students attending district schools. In April of
1981, a research proposal was sent to the district for review. A
number of conversations with school officials and the Director of
the research committee followed. Concern was expressed about several aspects of the proposed project. The costs of the study, both in terms of money and staff time, was one concern. School personnel would be unable to
provide assistance during regular working hours.
They would have to be compensated for working addition, I- ~agreed to do so. Another ic=.~^ a- -
.~..~ "ualllonal Hours if they
confidentialit o
y f respondents. In June of 1981, a letter from the director of the research committee stating that the proposal would be circulated among committee members prior to their first fall meeting to be held on or about September 23, 1981, was received. A copy of
the survey instrument was requested.
During the summer of 1981, the thought occurred that nearly a
year had been spent preparing to conduct the study in Brown Deer, but there was still no indication that the research request would be
granted. The Superintendent showed interest in the project, but the fact that it was taking so long to obtain permission to conduct the
study prompted serious questioning of whether permission would be granted under any circumstances. Still, the desire to conduct the
study persisted.
Intent on pursuing the subject. the interracial schooling issue were contacted.
several persons knowledgable of
These sources
indicated that the ream_ ~^ --
120
- ..- Per zzu program would possibly by discontinued
in Brown Deer. A variety of reasons was given for the possible dis-continuation. Among them were the following: the school district saw no need to accept black students from Milwaukee to further integration since the black population in Brown Deer was increasing at a rapid rate; disciplinary problems had increased since the program began; too many supplementary educational programs were necessary in order to meet the needs of Chapter 220 students; and the program simply was not work-ing due to differences in the backgrounds and academic preparation be-tween 220 and resident students. The stated reasons did not seem as important as the fact that if the program was to be discontinued, the research would be obsolete in terms of benefit to the school system and policy implications before it was completed.
Prior to the scheduled September research committee meeting, the Director of the research committee was contacted and asked that the proposal not be considered. In October of 1981, the research committee director sent a letter stating that as requested, no action was taken on the proposal at the research committee meeting held October 6, 1981. There was no further contact with Brown Deer school officials.
NICOLET
Determined to conduct a study of black achievment in a suburban interracial school, the Shorewood and Nicolet school districts were considered as possible alternative settings. Since conducting this type of research necessitates numerous trips to the district under in-vestigation, Shorewood would have been favored on the basis of its
121 proximity to the YAM campus. Another advantage that might have ac-crued from the selection of Shorewood is the fact that the district had been involved, although on a very small scale, with promoting racial and cultural exchange for a number of years.26 Despite these advantages, the Nicolet District was ultimately selected.
The Nicolet High School District was selected for several reasons. Palay's (1978) report suggested that Nicolet had been supportive of the Chapter 220 program from the very beginning. The district in-creased the number of 220 students each year and employed a guidance counselor who, in addition to other duties, was responsible for the social support, selection, and retention of Chapter 220 students. This "multi-ethnic" counselor organized a variety of activities designed to increase white students' and faculty's understanding of black culture, promote better race relations between black and white students, and increase black students' knowledge and understanding of their history and culture. In February of 1982, she organized a Black History Month program which emphasized the contributions of blacks in various areas, including music, dance, and literature. White students, faculty, and parents were encouraged to attend. A noted black writer, David Bradley, author of The Chaneysville Incident among other works, spoke at the school at her invitation. Another reason for the selection of the Nicolet district was that a study involving all schools within a given suburban district would probably have been too large an undertaking given the time it would have taken to conduct such a stay, and having
s
122
to deal with the problems of monetary constraints. The fact that the Nicolet High School district is an independent school district made the research effort more managable. The high academic standards of the school made it an ideal setting for an investigation of the factors related to academic achievement. Nearly 80! of Nicolet's 1981 graduating class enrolled in four-year colleges. The mean cumulative SPA of Nicolet students in 1981 was 3.60 on a 5.0 scale. Finally, a study of achievement at Nicolet provides an opportunity to look at sub-urban diversification in terms of status differentials.
Students from the suburbs of Bayside, Glendale, Fox Point, and River Hills, comprise the resident population of Nicolet. Of these four suburbs, three are in the top ten in the state in median family income. River Hills and Bayside rank first and third, respectively. Even though Glendale does not rank as high as the other three suburbs, Glendale's median family income is significantly higher than that of the city of Milwaukee.
On October 3rd, Nicolet's then "multi-ethnic" counselor was con-tacted in regard to conducting a study of black student achievement at Nicolet. Prepared for the possible obstacles to be encountered m school system research and having attempted to address the types of concerns expressed by Brown Deer, the nature and purpose of the pro-posed study was disucssed. It was suggested that the Director of Pupil Services be contacted. On October 5, 1981, he was contacted. After a discussion of the possible merits of such a study, interest in
-
TABLE 3.2
ECONOMIC AND RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BAYSIDE, GLENDALE,
FOX POINT, RIVER HILLS, AND MILWAUKEE
Total
Popula- Whites Blacks % Black
tion
Bayside 4,612 4,460 102
Glendale 13,882 13,142 462
Fox Point 7,649 7,505
River Hills 1,642
Milwaukee 636,212
1, SSS
466,620
2.21
3.34
71 .93
34 2.07
146,940 23.09
Median % Below
family poverty
income level
$45,884 1.4%
31,111 2.6%
40,635 2.0'
55,277 2.71
19.783 13.81
School population
3 years old and
over
_ _
1,108
2,856
2,511
1,515
122,714
124
the project was expressed. On October 12, the Director of Pupil Ser-vices and the then "multi-ethnic" counselor were sent copies of the proposal.
After review of the proposal, the pupil services director stated that while the project sounded very interesting, the request to con-duct the research would be denied. It seemed that the Brown Deer experience was to reoccur. A few days later, he was contacted again and asked why the investigation could not be conducted. The potential educational value of the research was again discussed. It was then stated that if white as well as black student achievement was investi-gated, the request would be reconsidered. Upon agreement to this con-dition and after a favorable review of the questionnaire, permission to conduct the study was granted. The process of obtaining permission to conduct the study took approximately four months. however, was weel worth the wait.
DATA COLLECTION
The time required,
Nicolet provided students' grade point averages, year in school, sex, and previous school attended. Additionally, the school provided general background information describing the curriculum, the student body, and its involvement in Chapter 220, including the percentage of Nicolet graduates who had attended college prior to the 1981-1982 school year, mean grade point averages, course descriptions, and an explanation of their grading system. IQ and standardized test scores were also requested, but the school could not provide them. A questionnaire was designed in order to secure a data base that would permit the testing
of the hypothesized relationships between SES, family culture, and achievement. In addition to socioeconomic status and family culture measures, the questionnaire contained items pertaining to student in-volvement in extracurricular activities, residence, and incidence of
reprimand.
A random sample of white students stratified by sex and year in school was generated on Nicolet's in-house computer. The sample of white students consisted of 70 pupils from each of the four grade levels, freshman through senior. Of the seventy students in each grade level, 35 were male and 35 were female. Since Nicolet's black student
population was so small, an attempt was made to obtain information for
all blacks.
The first set of cover letters and questionnaires was mailed in mid-April of 1982. The second mailing took place in May. A follow-up postcard was mailed approximately two weeks after the second mailing. Since respondents were to remain anonymous, questionnaires were mailed and received by Nicolet personnel. The questionnaires and envelopes in which they were mailed had been numbered from 1 to 427. These codes corresponded to the five digit student identification numbers. School personnel were given a list of student identification numbers and cor-responding codes. Nicolet staff then matched the student I.D. numbers and codes with pupils' places of residence and placed address labels on the envelopes. This procedure protected the anonymity of all par-ticipating households.
Almost 25% of total returns were received during the week follow-ing the first mailing. Another 25% came during the following week.
126
Responses to the second mailing followed a,similar pattern with ap-proximately 25% of responses returned during the first week and another 18% in the second week. The follow-up postcard brought about 18 or only 10% of returns.
Table 3.3 shows that 90, or 53.6% of the students whose parents returned the questionnaire were females and 46.4% were males. The response rate for the parents of freshmen was highest, followed by sophomores, juniors, and seniors. This may be partially due to will-ingness on the part of parents whose children have yet to complete a grade level to participate in a study endorsed by the school.
The response rate for whites was significantly higher than for blacks. Tables 3.5 and 3.6 show that the response rate for whites was 45.71% as compared to 27.218 for blacks. Nearly 30% of parents of 220 students returned the questionnaire, compared to 21.74% of resident black parents. (See Tables 3.7 and 3.8).
TABLE 3.3
TOTAL RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL
AND SEX OF STUDENT
Year in --
School
Senior
Junior
Sophomore
Sex Total
Male Female Responses
-
14 19 33
23 19 42
19 26 45
Freshman 22 26
78 90
48
168 1,679
Total Total Responses
Population as % of population
424
441
407
407 11.79
7.78
9.52
11.05
10.00
127
Year in School
Senior
Junior 21
Sophomore
Freshman
TABLE 3.4
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL Ape SEX
OF STUDENT FOR WHITE STUDENT POPULATION
Sex Total Total Total Responses as
Male Female Responses Population % of Population
10 15 25
15 36
17 31
36
14
16 20
389
410
369
364
6.45
8.78
8.40
9.89
61 67 128 1,532 8.36
Year in School
TABLE 3.5
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL Amp SEX
OF STUDENT FOR WHITE STUDENT SAMPLE
Sex Total Total Total Responses
Male Female Responses Sample Size as of % of Sample
Senior 10 15 25 70 35.71
Junior 21 15 36 70 51.43
Sophomore 14 17 31 70 44.29
Freshman 16 20 36 70 51.43
61 67 128 280 45.71
128
TABLE 3.6
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL AND SEX
OF STUDENT FOR BLACK STUDENT POPULATION
Year in Sex Total Total Total Responses
School Male Female Responses Population as ~ of Population
Senior 4 4 8 35 22.86
Junior 2 4 6 31 19.35
Sophomore 5 9 14 38 36.84
Freshman 6 6 12 43 27.91
17 23 40 147 27,21
TABLE 3.7
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL AND SEX
OF STUDENT FOR CHAPTER 220 BLACK STUDENTS
Year in Sex Total Total Total Responses
School Mile Female Responses Population as of % Population
Senior 1 4 5 19 26.32
Junior 0 3 3 21 14.29
Sophomore 4 8 12 27 44.44
Freshman 5 5 10 34 29.41
10 20 30 101 29.70
129
Year in School
TABLE 3.8
RESPONSES BY YEAR IN SCHOOL AND SEX
OF STUDENT FOR RESIDENT BLACK STUDENTS
Sex Total Total Total Responses
Male Female Responses Population as of % Population
Senior 3 0 3 16 18.75
Junior 2 1 3 10 30.00
Sophomore 1 1 2 11 18.18
Freshman 1 1 2 9 22.22
7 3 10 46 21.74
Respondent
The overwhelming majority of the respondents, 106 or 63.9%, were mothers. Almost 20% of the questionnaires were returned by fathers, and roughly 16% by both parents, for totals of 33 and 27 respectively. In two instances the identities of respondents were not reported.
TABLE 3.9
RESPONSES BY QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONDENT Ado RACE
Race Race as % of Total
Total White Black Whites Blacks Percent
_ . _
Mothers 106 75 31 70.75 29.25 100.00
Fathers 33 29 4 87.88 12.12 100.00
Both parents 27 22 5 31.48 18.52 100.00
Unknown 2 2 0 100.00 9.00 100.00
TOTALS 168 128 40 76.19 23.81 100.00
130
SOCIOECONOMIC CHARAclkRISTICS OF THE SAMPLE
Only seventeen white families, or 13.4i, had annual family in-comes of below $25,000. Approximately 43% had incomes ranging between S25,000 and $49,999. Fifty-five families or 43% earned $50,000 or more per year. The majority of the families of Chapter 220 students earned less than S25,000 annually. Almost 18% of families in this group had yearly incomes of between $25,000 and $49,000. Five families of transfer students, or 17.9`, earned $50,000 or more annually. In-come was reported for only seven resident black families. All of these families earned at least $25,000 per year. Two families, or 28.6$, had incomes ranging between $25,000 and $49,999 and 71.4% earned $50,000 or more.
The income figures for blacks are combined in Table 3.10. As the table shows, white families had significantly higher incomes than blacks as a group. Almost 50% of black families earned less than $25,000 yearly compared to only 13% of white families.
Almost 50\ of the fathers of white students completed a four-year college degree. Approximately 44\ completed college and 7% ob-tained graduate and professional degrees (law, medical, etc.). The educational level of black fathers was considerably lower than that of whites. Nearly 70% of black fathers did not complete a college degree. Of the five black fathers who did not complete college (13%), three were the fathers of resident black students. About 13% of black fathers completed graduate or professional degrees, all of whom were the fathers of 220 black students. The educational level of fathers
131
TABLE 3.10
ANNUAL FAllILY INCOME BY RACE
Group Absolute Frequency % of Totals
WHITES 127 100.0
Below $25,000 17 13.4
$25,000-$49,999 55 43.3
$50,000 or more 55 43.3
BLACKS 35 100.0
Below $25,000 17 48.6
$25,000-$49,999 7 20.0
$50,000 or more 11 31.4
TOTAL 162 100.0
Below $25,000 34 29.9
$25,000-$49,999 62 38.3
$50,000 or more 66 40.8
of resident black students was reported in nine cases.
The majority of fathers in the sample, 54.8%, did not obtain a college degree, but as Table 3.11 shows, just over 45% obtained at least a four-year college degree.
The highest educational level attained by the majority of white mothers, almost 60t, was high school graduation. Thirty-one, or 24.4\ of the mothers of white students did not complete high school. Almost
132
Group
TABLE 3.11
EDUCATION LEVEL OF FATHERS BY RACE
Absolute Frequencey
WHITES
Less than 4 year degree
Four year degree
Graduate or professional degree 9
128
63
56
BLACKS
Less than 4 year degree
Four year degree
Graduate or professional degree 5
TOTAL
Less than 4 year degree
Four year degree
Graduate or professional degree
% of Totals
100.0
49.2
43.8
7.0
38 28
166
91
61
14
100.0
73.7
13.2
13.2
100.0
54.8
36.8
8.4
23% completed at least a four year degree; and of this group, 27.6% completed graduate or professional school. The highest educational level obtained by the majority of black mothers, 56.8%, was also high school graduation. All of the black mothers in this group were parents of Chapter 220 students. A higher percentage of black mothers, 35%, completed college than white mothers. More than half of the black
133
TABLE 3.12
EDUCATIONAL LEVEL OF MOTHERS BY RACE
Absolute Frequency
127
Group
WHITES
High school or less
Some college
Four year degree
BLACKS
High school or less
Some college
Four year degree
TOTAL
High school or less
Some college
Four year degree
76
22
29
37
21
3
13
164
97
25
42
% of Totals
100.0
59.8
17.3
22.8
100.0
56.8
8.1
35.1
100.0
59.2
15.2
25.6
_
mothers who completed college (7) were the parents of resident black students, even though there were four times as many Chapter 220 par-ents responding as resident blacks.
Approximately 72% of whites (92) attended public schools prior to attending Nicolet, compared to 65% of blacks. Thirty-five percent of blacks and 28% of whites attended public schools. Two of the ten resident black respondents reported that their children had gone to
134
private schools. Over-all, 118, or 70% of students had only attended public schools.
One hundred fifty-five out of 163, or 96% of families owned their own homes. Approximately 98% of whites compared to 87% of blacks were home owners. The majority of the 166 families that reported their residence, almost 39% resided in Glendale. Approximately 24%, 17\, 17% and 3% of families lived in Fox Point, Milwaukee, Bayside, and River Hills, respectively. For whites, the residential distribution of the sample followed the same patterns. One hundred twenty-seven whites reported their place of residence. About 46%, 29%, 21% and 4% lived in Glendale, Fox Point, Bayside, and River Hills, respectively. Six of the ten families of resident black students resided in Glen-dale. Three of these families lived in Fox Point and one in Bayside.
VARIABLES ANT MEASUREMENT
In Chapters I and II, socioeconomic status, family culture, and
other concepts relevant to this research were discussed in broad
terms. This section presents the specific applications of these con-
cepts through the employment of the following set of surrogate vari-
ables:
GPA: Grade point average was the measure of academic achievement em-
ployed. When used in multiple regression analysis, GPA was always
a dependent variable. It is defined as the cumulative GPA of students
for the 1981-1982 school year on a 5.0 sclae and was measured in
135
absolute terms. F~THER'S EDUCATION: Mother's education refers to the highest level of education attained by students' mothers at the time of the survey. Nine categories ranging from (1) less than seven years, to (9) other--please specify, were used to measure this variable. These original categories were then collapsed into three categories which were: (a) high school or less, (b) at least one year in college, but did not obtain a four year degree, and (c) at least a four year degree. A meanof 4.5, for example, would indicate that mothers completed high school but did not complete one full year of college.27 FATHER'S EDUCATION: This variable was defined and measured in the same manner as the previous variable, but pertains to fathers. It too was collapsed into three categories, which were: (a) less than a four year degree, (b) at least a four year degree, but did not com-plete a graduate or professional degree, and (c) graduate or profes-sional degree. The mean for this variable represents the same educa-tional level as for MCTHER'S EDUCATION.28 }lOTHER'S OCCUPATION: This variable was defined as the full or part-time occupations of students' mothers at the time of the survey (spring 1982). Respondents were asked to provide a brief description of mother's present occupations, which were then translated into NORC scores. The North-Hatt occupational prestige index (NORC) assigns values to occupations based on occupational prestige, education, and income, and is one of the most widely used measures of occupational
136
status. It is generally employed in survey research.29
FATHER'S OCCUPATION: Defined and measured in the same manner as the
preceding variable, it refers to the occupations fo students' fathers.
INCOME: Income was defined as the annual income from employment
earned by both parents (when applicable). It was measured in seven
categories ranging from (1) less than $5,000 to (7) $50,000 or more.
These original categories were collapsed into three, which were:
(a) less than $25,000, (b) S25,000 to $49,999, and (c) $50,000 or
more. A mean of 5.0, for example, would indicate that a family earned
between $20,000 and $24,999 annually. 30
HKi£ OWNERSHIP: This variable refers to whether parents own or rent
their homes.
P.\REN~S' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS: Parent's educational aspirations
refers to how strongly parents feel about their children getting a
college education. Respondents were asked whether and to what extent
they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: "I would like
my children to get a college education." A mean of 1.0 represents
strong disagreement with the statement indicating low parents' educa-
tional aspirations. A mean of 5.0 represents high educational aspira-
tions.
PARENTS' READING HABITS: This variable measures how frequently parents'
read books for pleasure. Five response categories ranging from (1)
never to (5) frequently, were used to measure parents' reading habits.
A mean of 1.0 indicates that parents never read books for pleasure.
r'
~ lj
1
137
A mean Of 5.0 represe
Sequent reading for Pleasu
1 Participation is a measur f
ent of Parental invOlV
n school related activities. The exte
t to which Parents (1) attended large-scale
Social functions (bat
raiSerS, etC.). (2) were in 1
ubs or Organizations as
, nd (3) participated in Sol
activities, was deter
same S~P°int scale Used t
the previous variable
were Collapsed into a si 1
A mean of 2.o, for example, indicates that parents __--in Social activities
PTA MEETINGS:
Parents rarely participat d
is variable to the frequency of parent
Parent/Teacher Or a
g nization att
It was measured in the
manner as PARENT A mean of 1~0 Would indic
parents never attende n Of S. Of that they
tended.
SIZE Family size is: '
._, Frequently at-
dents' families
ESTEEM: Self esteem is d f
worth Uses node it'
En (see page 19). It
eaSUred by a seven-item scat
ix items or adaptations
~ from Rosenberg~s (1965) g
self-esteem scale and
P ion of one of Coopersmith, (19 items from his Self E
steem Invent
ory.. Coopersmith's ite
to make it more suitabl
It population. The Rosenbe
the most Widely Used measu
general or global self-
138
esteem. This scale, and shorter versions of it, are often useful in research situations in which questionnaires are lengthy and/or con-tain a number of items not pertaining to self-esteem.
Five of the items were phrased in apositive direction and two in a negative direction. Four response categories ranging from (1) strongly agree to (4) strongly disagree were used for each item. A single score was obtained by computing an average over the items in the scale for each case rather than a simple sum. A mean of 4.0 re-presents high self-esteem. A mean of 1.0 indicates low self-esteem.
The scale reliability, or ALPHA, which is "the variation over an infinitely large number of independent repeated trials of error of measurement,''31 is .80318.
LOCUS OF CONTROL: Locus of control was defined as the extent to which individuals believe that events are determined by their own actions or by luck, fate, or the actions of powerful others. (See page 21). A ten item scale was used to measure locus of control. Nine of the items were statements or adaptations of statements from Rotter's (1966) 23 item Locus of Control Inventory. The other item was one of those used by Coleman (1966) to measure locus of control Rotter's inventory, which is among the most widely employed measures of internal/external control, is a forced choice scale. The response categories were the same as those used for SELF-ESTEEM. A mean of 1.0 represents a strong sense of external control. A strong sense of internal control is
represented by a mean of 4.0. ALPHA for the scale is .80023.
139
EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES: Extracurricular activities was defined as the extent of student involvement in school activities (such as clubs and student government) other than organized sports. It was measured by determining whether students were (1) not involved at all, (2) somewhat involved, or (3) very involved in school activities. SUSPENSIONS: This variable refers to the number of times students had been suspended while attending Nicolet. AGE: Age refers to the age of students in years. SEX: Sex was defined as male or female. PRIOR SCHOOL STATUS: Prior school status was determined by whether students had ever attended private schools prior to attending Nicolet. PREVIOUS SCHOOLS ATTENDED: This variable refers to the school at-tended by students prior to Nicolet. Ten categories were created by determining the nine schools most co D nly attended by students prior to Nicolet and classifying any other school as (1) other. Three of the schools, (1) Maple Dale, (2) Glen Hills, and (3) Bayside Middle, are Nicolet Feeder schools. Four were the most co D nly attended private schools by black and white students. The remaining two were the schools most commonly attended by Chapter 220 students. CONDITION_ OF ATTENDANCE: Conditions of attendance refers to whether students (1) were white and resided in the school district, (2) were black and attended under the Chapter 220 program, or (3) were black and lived in the Nicolet district.
RESIDENCE: Residence refers to whether families lived in (1) Fox
140
Point, (2) River Hills, (3) Bayside, (4) Glendale, or (5) Milwaukee. RACE: Race was defined as black or white.
Other's education, father's education, mother's occupation, father's occupation, income, and home ownership are classified as status variables. Income, education, and occupation are the most com-monly employed measures of socioeconomic status. The purchasing of a home is a reflection of financial status.
Family culture is reflected in a set of internal and external measures. The internal measures, parents' educational aspirations, self-esteem, and locus of control, represent parental attitudes and values. If the common argument that family size is a reflection of parental attitudes and values is accepted, family size too can be con-sidered an internal measure. Parents' reading habits, social parti-cipation and attendance at PTA meetings are behavior patterns, or the outward manifestations of attitudes and values, and therefore repre-sent external measures of family culture.
Involvement in extracurricular activities, number of suspensions, age, and sex are student characteristics. The conditions under which students attend Nicolet represent student mobility status. CONDITIONS OF ATIE}3lANCE is technically a student characteristic, but it is also a reflection of parental status and aspects of family culture. The decision of parents to involve their children in the Chapter 220 pro-gram, for example, may be a reflection of educational aspirations for them.
141
The school attended by a student prior to Nicolet as well as PRIOR SCHOOL STATUS are school characteristics.
RESIDENCE is an environmental variable. Like CONDITIONS OF AUn12dDANCE, it reflects parental status and attitudes and values not investigated in this research. Although socioeconomic status for the most part determines whether one can afford to purchase a home in middle and upper class suburbs, having a given income does not nec-essarily mean that one will do so. Some people prefer to live within the city.
RACE is considered a social characteristic. While race is also a biological trait, the argument that genetic differences between blacks and whites determine or influence academic achievement is re-jected. Instead, it is argued that past and present discrimination against blacks is largely responsible for differences in socioeconomic status between blacks and whites. This is not to imply that the atti-tudes and values held by some blacks have not affected their mobility. These attitudes and values, however, are influenced by social status and economic position. Coleman (1966), for example, reported that children from disadvantaged groups (including blacks) were more ex-ternal in their control beliefs. The unresponsive nature of their environments was cited as one of the reasons (see page 16).
142
TABLE 3.13
NS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELEc-1tD
VARIABLES USED IN ANALYSIS
Total Whites Blacks
SPA 3.70 3.90 2 98
(.97) (.93) ( 74)
bbther's Education 4.54 4.78
(1.50) (1.96)*
Father's Education 5.64 4.61
- (1.546) (1.g5)**
Nbther's Occupation 48.32 46.97 52.18
(29.16) (29.60) (28.24)
Father's Occupation 70.32 76.18 50.14
(22.40) (14.14) (32.31)
Income 6.18 4.97***
(1.03) (2.107)
Parents' Educational Aspi- 4.71 4.66 4.86
- rations (.60) (.65) (3~35)
Parents' Reading Habits 4.04 4.10 3.86
(1.02) (1.10) (1.07)
Social Participation 3.16 3.16 3.28
(.90) (~87) (.87)
PTA Meetings 2.93 2.80 3.42
(1.21) (1.20) (1.31)
Family Size 2.79 2.83 2.66
(1.30) (1.34) (1.15)
Self-Esteem 3.42 3.39 3.51
(.38) (.37) (.40)
Locus of Control 3.08 3.05 3.16
(.39) (.38) (.40)
143
TABLE 3.13 (continued)
_ _ .
Extracurricular Activities 1.84 1 86 1.92
(.64) ( 63) (.70)
Suspensions 1.11 1.11 1.11
(.45) (.46) (.40)
Age 15.88 15.94 15.70
(1.29) (1.31) (1.22)
TOTAL, N = 160 WHITES, N = 124 BLACKS, N = 36
* Means and standard deviations for mother's education based on Ns of 127 and 37 for whites and blacks, respectively.
** Mbans and standard deviations for father's education based on Ns of 128 and 38 for whites and blacks, respectively.
*** Means and standard deviations for income based on Ns of 127 and 35 for blacks and whites, respectively.
TABLE 3.14
lDi4NS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELECTED
CHARACTERISTICS OF MOTHERS, FATHERS, AND BOTH PARENTS
Both Parents Fathers
Mothers
Parents' Educational 4.85 4.85 4.63
Aspirations (~36) (.37) (.69)
Parents' Reading Habits 4.26 3.66 4.11
(.86) (1.15) (.99)
Social Participation 3.38 2.99 3.19
(1.01) (.74) (.88,
PTA Meetings 3.11 2.81 2.93
(1.48) (1.36) (1.09)
Self-Esteem 3.56 3.51 3.35
(.40) (.40) (.36)
144
TABLE 3.14 (continued)
Locus of Control 3.21 3.15 3.02
(.48) (.35) (.36)
BOTH PARENTS, N = 27 FATHERS, N = 33 fXT1HERS, N = 100
The major hypotheses pertain to the association between socio-
economic status, family culture, race, and academic achievement and
are as follows:
HI Higher levels of mothers' education are positively associated with student achievement.
H2 Higher levels of fathers' education are positively associated with student achievement.
H3 Higher family income levels are positively associated with student achievement.
H4 Higher fathers' occupational status is positively associated with student achievement.
H5 Higher parentalsocial participation is positively associated with student achievement.
H6 Higher parental self-esteem is positively associated with student achievement.
H7 Stronger parental sense of internal co ntrol is positively associ-ated with student achievement.
Ha Higher parental educational aspirations are positively associated with student achievement.
145
Hg Higher frequencies of parental attendance at PTA meetings are positively associated with student achievement.
Hlo Higher parental frequencies of reading books for pleasure are positively associated with student achievement.
Hll Race is negatively associated with student achievement.
The following hypotheses pertaining to the relationships between
student and school characteristics and achievement will also be ex-
amined:
H12 Higher numbers of student suspensions are negatively associated with student achievement.
H13 Greater student involvement in extracurricular activities is positively associated with student achievement.
H14 Private school attendance will be positively associated with academic achievement.
146
~ IV
DATA ANALYSIS
ACADEMIC ACHIE\~{ENT
Three stepwise multiple regression proceedures with listwise deletion of missing data were performed in order to examine the hy-pothesized relationships between socioeconomic status variables, measures of family culture, school characteristics, attributes of students, race, and academic achievement. Grade point average (GPA) is the dependent variable in all three equations. Table 4.3 contains information on total student achievement. The independent variables were: mothers' education, fathers' education, fathers' occupation, income, parents' educational aspirations, social participation, parents' reading habits, self-esteem, locus of control, family size, age, sex, suspensions, extracurricular activities, previous school status, and race. Table 4.4 contains information on white student achievement. The independent variables were the same as in the first procedure with the exception of race. Information on the predictors and correlates of black student achievement is presented in Table 4.5. The independent variables were the same as those used in the analysis of white student acheivement with the addition of conditions of at-tendance and home ownership. There was not enough variation in home ownership for white parents to use this variable in the analysis of their children's achievement.
147
SOCIOECONoMIC STATUS AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVED
-
This section analyzes the data pertaining to socioeconomic status variables and GPA.
The findings reported in Table 4.3 support the hypothesized re-lationships between mothers' education and achievement, fathers' educa-tion and achievement, and income and achievement. The literature on SES and achievement generally supports these findings [Kelin (1971), Bunnell (1971), St. John (1970)1. Fotheringham and Creal (1971) em-ployed fathers' schooling, mothers' schooling, fathers' occupation, and family income as measures of SES and found that SES variables accounted for 28% of the variation in reading achievement and 25' of the variance in arithmetic computation. Sexton (1961) found that the Iowa Achievement Test scores of both elementary and high school students rose with family income levels.
Table 4.3 shows that the strongest predictor of GPA for all students is fathers' not having completed a four-year college degree. The unstandardized regression coefficient for the association between GPA and the father not completing a college degree is -.708 and is significant at the .01 level. The standardized regression coefficient or Beta, is -.346. A moderate negative correlation (r - -.497) was found between GPA and the fathers' not having completed college. Mothers' educational level is also a strong predictor of achievement for all students. The unstandardized regression coefficient for the association between GPA and mothers' completion of a four-year college
.
148
degree is .412 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .202 The correlation between GPA and mothers' college completion is less than moderate, (r - .292).
Family size was also found to predict achievement but is not as strong a predictor as mothers' and fathers' educational levels. Beta for this association is .136. The unstandardized regression coef-ficient is .101 and is significant at the .05 level. The correlation between GPA and family size (r ~ .103) is weak. This finding is in-consistent with most of the literature on the subject. Sowell (1975) reported that large family size is negatively correlated with income. Since higher income is positively related to achievement, Sowell's findings would indicate that large family size has a negative impact on student performance. Scott and Robes (1974) found that the achieve-ment of black children from small families is significantly higher than that of black students from large families. Studies concluding that large family size, like that performed by Scott and Kobes, often compare large families to very small families. This may account for these findings. The average family size of students in the present investigation (mean a 2.79), was relatively small. Additionally, there is not a great deal of variation (SD - 1.30) in family size.
Family income, like family size, is not as strong a predictor of GPA as parents' educational levels. Beta for the association between GPA and a family income of 550,000 or more is .134 and B is .264, which is significant at the .05 level. There is a moderate
149
positive correlation between a family income of ss~,,ono or more and GAP (r ~ .3093.
The correlation between GPA and fathers' occupation was negli-glible (r - .074). There `'as a moderate correlation (r a .3S5) between fathers' occupation and father's completion Of a graduate or profes-sional degree. The results contained in Table 4.4 support the hypothesized relationships between fathers' education and achievement and income and achievement. Again, these findings are consistent with the literature 1Knief and Stroud (1959), Fetter (1975)].
The father not completing a college degree is the strongest pre-dictor of achievement for white students. The unstandardized regres-sion coefficient for this association is -.876 and is significant at the .01 level. The standardized regression coefficient is -.416. There is a moderate negative correlation (r ~ .508) between GPA and fathers' not completing college.
A family income of $50,000 or more has a moderate positive cor-relation (r ~ .332) with GPA, and is also a strong predictor of achieve-ment. The unstandardized regression coefficient for this relationship is .360 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .203. Family size ants the last status variable found to be a predictor of white student achievement. The beta coefficient is .170. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .118 and is significant at the .05 level. Pather's occupation only had a correlation of .04~ with GPA. The
1
150
correlations between the various status characteristics are all quite weak with the exception of that between fathers' occupation and fathers' completion of a graduate or professional degree, which was .340.
The results reported in Table 4.5 support the hypothesized rela-tionships between mothers' education and academic achievement and home ownership and achievement. Epps (1974) found that mothers' education had a significant positive correlation with the grades of Southern black female high school students. Murname, Maynard and Ohls (1980) found that the children of black mothers who completed high school achieved at significantly higher levels than black students whose mothers did not complete high school.
Beta for the relationship between GPA and mothers' completion of a four-year college degree is .397. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .610 and is significant at the .01 level. The correla-tion between the two is .651, which is considered moderate given the small population size. The unstandardized regression coefficient for the association between home ownership and GPA is .710 and significant at the .01 level. The beta coefficient for the relationship is .388. Like mothers' education, home ownership has a moderate positive cor-relation with GPA.
There are a number of intercorrelations between status character-istics that are worth noting. Fathers' occupation, which only has a correlation of .270 with GPA; has a correlation of -.400 with
.,
l
151
mothers' high school completion. The correlation between fathers' occupation and conditions of attendance was .521. The correlation between fathers' completion of graduate or professional school and conditions of attendance is .614. There is also a moderate positive correlation of .434 between GPA and conditions of attendance for blacks. One reason that conditions of attendance did not predict achievement may be that it is moderately correlated with several status characteristics and is a function of these characteristics.
A test of the difference in means (t-test) was performed in order to examine the proposition that the grade point averages of resident black students are significantly higher than those of Chapter 220 stu-dents. The difference in the achievement of the two groups was highly significant. For resident black students, the mean GPA was 3.489 and the standard deviation was .698. The mean GPA of Chapter 220 students was 2.786 and the standard deviation was .662. At 34 degrees of freedom, the T value was -2.81 and the 2-tail probability was .008, significant at the .01 level.
An explanation for the differences in the achievement of the two groups may be significant differences in the predictors of achievement. Mothers of resident black students (see Chapter III) had higher educa-tional levels than the mothers of Chapter 220 students. Additionally, all resident black parents were home owners.
Discussion
The findings generally supported the hypothesized relationships
152
between SES variables and academic achievement. The major exception is that fathers' occupational status was not significantly associated with achievement for total white,or black students. An examination of the correlations between fathers' occupation and other status characteristics did not reveal any strong associations.
One possible explanation for the finding of no significant asso-ciation between fathers' occupation and achievement is that occupation is a function of education and that once fathers' educational level entered the equations, the effects of occupation were in part explained. Another explanation is that fathers' occupation is often used as the only indicator of SES. The effects of other indicators go unnoticed. As stated in Chapter II, occupation, which is generally measured by scores on O.D. Duncan's Socioeconomic Index or the NORC Index, is the most widely used single indicator of SES. White (1982), who performed one of the most extensive reviews of the literature on SES and achieve-ment, concluded that of all the traditional measures of socioeconomic status, income is the highest single correlate of achievement. Cole-man (1966) concluded that parents' education has the highest relation to achievement for blacks and whites. Finally, Epps (1974) found that fathers' occupation had almost no relationship to the school grades of black students.
FA>lILY CULTURE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
The results in Table 4.3 support the hypothesized relationship
153
between parents' educational aspirations and academic achievement. Numerous studies have found that parents' educational aspirations have a positive influence on achievement [Babcock (1972), Crandall, Dewey, Katkowsky, and Preston (1964), and Keeves (1972)]. Gigliotti and Brookover (1975) found a strong relationship between student achievement and parents' educational aspirations.
Table 4.3 shows that parents' educational aspirations is the only family culture variable that is a predictor of achievement for all students. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .301 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .186. The weak correlation found between parents' educational aspirations (.161) is consistent with Pugh's (1976) findings reported in Chapter II.
Table 4.4 shows that parents' educational aspirations is a pre-dictor of achievement for white students. Beta is .203. The un-standardized regression coefficient is .293 and is significant at the .01 level. The correlation between SPA and parents' educational aspi-rations (.255) is weak.
Parents' educational aspirations are relatively unrelated to any of the family culture or SES variables even though this variable, ac-cording to White (1982), is sometimes employed as a measure of SES. The highest correlations between parents' educational aspirations and other family culture variables were those between parents' educational aspirations and self-esteem (.281), and parents' educational aspira-tions and locus of control (.256).
154
The hypothesized relationship between social participation and student achievement is supported for blacks, '['able 4.3 shows that social participation is positively correlated with achievement (r = .417). Beta is .279. The unstandardized regression coefficient is .229 and is significant at the .01 level.
The social participation of blacks is related to SES c~.,~onents and other family culture variables. The correlations between GPA and fathers' occupation, mothers' completion of a college degree, and fathers' completion of a graduate or professional degree are .286, .289, and .419, respectively. Social participation is relatively unrelated to income. There is a relatively high correlation between self-esteem and the social participation of blacks Or - .717). Mbderate correla-tions between social participation and locus of control (r - .434), parents' reading habits (r ~ .556), and attendance at PTA meetings (r - .550). The correlation between social participation and parents' educational aspirations is .338.
These findings are consistent with those of Blau (1981). Blau reported correlations of .43, .32, and .31 between extrafamilial par-ticipation and mother's education, father's, and and mother's occupa-tional status, respectively. 'the correlation between extrafamilial participation, which was defined as mothers' participation in voluntary associations, was .19 for blacks and .17 for whites.
The hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and self-esteem, locus of control, attendance at PTA meetings, and parents'
155
reading habits were not supported by the results of the three regres-sion analyses. The strength of the associations between the social participation of blacks and other family culture variables and SES characteristics, however, prompted an investigation of the factors related to social partlc~pation for blacks and whites.
Two stepwise multiple procedures with listwise deletion of missing data were performed in order to determine the predictors of social par-ticipation for blacks and whites. Social participation was the de-pendent variable in both analyses. Table 4.1 contains data pertaining to the social participation of blacks, The independent variables were parents' educational aspirations, self-esteem, locus of control, parents' reading habits, PTA meeting attendance, mothers' occupation, fathers' occupation, mothers' education, fathers' education, and income. Table 4.2 contains information on the social participation of whites. The independent variables were the same used to examine the social par-ticipation of blacks.
Table 4.1 shows that the only dependent variable that is a pre-dictor of black student achievement is self-esteem. The correlation between social participation and self-esteem is relatively strong (r - .747), Beta, as is the unstandardized regression coefficient, is .747 which is significant at the ,01 level. Self-esteem accounts for approximately 55% of the total variation in the social participation of blacks.
Social participation is moderately correlated with locus of
156
control (r - .536), parents' reading habits (r = .395), mothers' high school graduation (r ~ -.367), mothers' college completion (r = .362), and fathers' completion of a graduate or professional degree (r = .390) The correlations between social participation and parents' educational aspirations, PTA meeting attendance, mothers' occupation, and fathers' occupation are 281, 335, ,324, and .335, respectively.
TABLE 4.1 REGRESSION OF SOCIAL PARTICIPATION ON PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, PARENTS' READING HABITS, PTA MEETING ATTENDANCE, METHERS' OCCUPATION, FATHERS' OCCUPATION, ME THE RS' EDUCA-TION, FATHERS' EDUCATION, AND INCOME FOR BLACKS.
B BETA CORREL ADJRSQ T
(1) Self-esteem .747 .747 .747 N - 39, R2 . .558 **Significant at .01 level.
.546 6.829**
As shown in Table 4.2, the strongest predictor of social partici-pation for whites also is self-esteem. Beta is 308 The unstandardized regression coefficient is .742 and is significant at the .01 level. There is a moderate positive correlation between social participation and self-esteem (r - .368), A family income of S50,000 or more is the second strongest predictor of the social participation of whites. The
157
correlation between the two variables is relatively weak (r = .248). The unstandardized regression coefficient is .377 and is significant at the ,01 level. Attendance at PTA meetings also predicts social participation for whites but is not as strong a predictor as self-esteem and income. Beta is .189. The unstandardized regression co-efficient is .141 and is significant at the .05 level. The correlation between social participation and PTA meeting attendance is quite weak (r = .182J, The three variables accounted for only 20% of the total variation in social participation for whites.
Social participation is relatively unrelated to any of the other variables in the equation with the exception of locus of control (r a 262J and family income of over S50,000 per year (r - .248).
TABLE 4.2
REGRESSION OF SOCIAL PARTICIPATION ON' PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, PARENTS' READING HABITS, PTA MEETING ATTENDANCE, htnODERS' OCCUPATION, FATHERS' OCCUPATION, Panniers' EDUCATION, FATHERS' EDUCATION, AND INOoME P0R hHITES.
D
(1) Self-esteem .742
(2) Family income of
$50,000 or more .377
aJ PTA meeting attendance
N - 127, R2 . ,200
*Significant at .0S level
**Significant at .01 level
BETA SORREL
.308 .368
,211 ,248
,141 .189 ,182
ADJRSQ T
_
.129 3.699**
.152 2.521**
,180 2.294*
158
Discussion
Self-esteem is the strongest predictor of social participation for both blacks and whites. This characteristic is a stronger predic-tor of social participation for blacks than whites. The correlation between PTA meeting attendance and social participation was stronger for blacks than whites, but PTA meeting attendance was not a predictor of the social participation of blacks. An income of $50,000 or more predicted social participation for whites but income was relatively unrelated to social participation for blacks.
One possible explanation for this finding is that there is a sig-nificant difference in the social participation of blacks and whites. A t-test of differences in means, however, indicates that there is no significant difference in the social participation of blacks and whites. For whites, the mean for social participation is 3.125 and the standard deviation is .886. For blacks, the mean for social participation is 3.250 and the standard deviation is .960. At 166 degrees of freedom, the T-value was -.76 and the 2-tail probability was .446, indicating that the social participation of the two groups is quite similar. The results of a T-test also show that the social participation of white parents and the parents of Chapter 220 students is very similar. At 156 degrees of freedom, the T-value was .19 and the 2-tail probability was .846. There is also no significant difference in the social par-ticipation of C apter 220 black parents and resident black parents, although the difference in the social participation of these two groups
159
is greater than that observed between white parents and the parents of Chapter 220 students. The mean for social participation for Chap-ter 220 black parents in 3.089 and the standard deviation is 1.032. The mean for social participation for resident black parents is 3.733 and the standard deviation is .466. At 38 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -1.90 and the 2-tail probability is .065. While the social participation of the two groups is not significantly different, the difference in social participation between these two groups is greater than that between the parents of whites and Chapter 220 students and between blacks and whites generally. There is also more variation in the social participation of the parents of Chapter 220 students. Sig-nificant differences were found in the social participation of white parents and resident black parents. At 136 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -2.14 and the 2-tail probability is .034. Resident black parents were more socially active than both white parents and the parents of Chapter 220 students. The parents of Chapter 220 students were the least socially active of the three groups. There is more variation in the social participation of blacks than in the social participation of whites.
When the family culture characteristic that was a predictor of
white student achievement was examined (parents' educational aspira-tions), no significant differences were found between the aspirations of white, resident black, and Chapter 220 black parents. The mean for whites on this variable is 4.633 and the standard deviation is .719. For the parents of Chapter 220 students, the mean is 4.833 and the
c
160
standard deviation is .379. The results of the T-test show that at 156 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -1.48 and the 2-tail probability is .142. There is more variation in parents' educational aspirations for whites than for the parents of Chapter 220 students. For resident black parents, the mean for this variable is 5.000. At 38 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -1.38 and the 2-tail probability is .176 when the educational aspirations of resident and Chapter 220 black parents are compared. When the educational aspirations of white and resident black parents were examined, the T-value at 136 degrees of freedom was -1.61 and the 2-tail probability was .110. The educational aspirations of resident black parents are the highest and those of whites are the lowest. When the educational aspirations of whites are cu,,~ared to blacks as a group, the difference is significant. For blacks, the mean is 4.875 and the standard deviation is .335. At 166 degrees of freedom the T-value is -2.06 and the 2-tail probability is .041.
The finding that parents' educational aspirations influence achieve-ment is consistent with the majority of research on the subject. Seg-iner (1983) stated that despite variations in definitions of parents' expectations, academic achievement, respondents' characteristics, and data collection methods, empirical studies generally support the con-tention that parents' educational expectations influence performance. Boocock (1972) stated that "it is clear that high achieving children tend to come from families who have high expectations for them and who make greater demands at an earlier age.1 Ibst investigations of the effects of parents' educational expectations and academic achievement
161
have found moderate correlations between the two [Reeves (1972), Shipman, McKee, and Bridgeman (1976), and Seginer (1982)].
Seginer (1983) stated that the three antecedents of parents' edu-cational expectations are: (a) school feedback, which pertains to the evaluation schools send to parents concerning the child's academic achievement, (b) the parents' educational aspirations for themselves, and (c) parental knowledge, which pertains to parents as naive psycholo-gists and educators.
One reason that parents' educations aspirations predicted the achievement of white students but not black students may be that the school feedback that white parents receive is more positive than that received by black parents. Another reason may be that the educational aspirations of white parents are more realistic than those of black parents. Coleman (1966) reported that black parents' educational aspi-rations were higher than those of white parents.
The results of a T-test confirm Coleman's findings. Black parents' educational aspirations are significantly higher than white parents' educational aspirations. For white parents, the mean for parents' aspi-rations is 4.633 and the standard deviation is .719. For black parents, the mean in 4.875 and the standard deviation is 4.875. The T-value is -2.06 and at 166 degrees of freedom, the 2-tail probability is .041.
The hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and the other family culture variables were not confirmed. As noted earlier, however, self-esteem was a strong predictor of social participation for blacks. There are also moderate correlations between several family
162
culture variables for blacks.
STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS AND ACAD~RC ACHIEVEMENT
Number of suspensions is the only student characteristic that predicts achievement. Table 4.3 shows that for the total sample of students, number of suspensions is a strong predictor of achievement. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.468 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is -.213. There is a negative correlation (r = -.251) between suspensions and achievement for all students.
For white students, number of suspensions is the second strongest predictor of achievement. As Table 4.1 shows, the correlation between GPA and number of suspensions for white students (r - -.257) is about the same as the correlation betwen GPA and number of suspensions for all students. Beta is -.206 and the unstandardized regression coeffi-cient is -.415 and is significant at the .01 level. There are no signi-ficant relationships between number of suspensions and any of the other variables examined for whites.
Number of suspensions is more strongly correlated with black stu-dent achievement than white student achievement. There is a moderate negative correlation (r-.370) between number of suspensions and GPA for black students. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.597 and is significant at the .01 level. Beta is .324. There is a moderately negative relationship between suspensions and female sex status for black students (r ~ .335). There is no significant difference in the number
163
of suspensions of black and white students. The mean number of sus-pensions of resident and Chapter 220 black students is the same, 1.1000. The white student suspension rate was slightly higher (mean = 1.1250) but the difference in black and white student suspension rates was insignificant.
Status of prior schooling is a strong predictor of achievement for black students. The correlation between GPA and public school at-tendance, however, is almost negligible (r = -.146). Beta is -.270. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.407 and is significant at the .01 level.
Status of prior schooling also predicts total student achievement. The correlations between public school attendance and GPA is -.012. Beta is -.132. The unstandardized regression coefficient is -.280 and is significant at the .05 level.
The reason for this finding is probably accounted for by the fact that Milwaukee public schools do not provide the same quality of in-struction as many private schools. Additionally, instruction methods in private schools may be more similar to those used at Nicolet.
Discussion
Disciplinary actions against students are often influenced by teachers' and administrators' perceptions of them. These perceptions in turn, have been found to be influenced by parental social and eco nomical status. Hollingshead (1949) reported that the school super-intendent was very sensitive to pressures from families who were in -
164
position to influence school board members. One example cited of how parents' social class position influenced student discipline involved implementation of the high school's tardy rule. Hollingshead reported that the teachers in the high school voted unanimously to send all tardy students to dentention with no exceptions. The superintendent, however, objected to the no-exceptions provision. He remarked:
You cannot make a rule like that stick in this town. There are students who simply cannot be sent to detention. Their families will not stand for it. I look for trouble from this.1
The second week after the rule went into effect, the daughter of a prominent family did not report to detention. That night her mother telephoned the superintendent's wife concerning a church supper and mentioned that the daughter had an appointment at the hairdresser. When the principal spoke to the girl the next day, he told her to go to class and not to let the situation happen again. Another incident involved the son of a prominent family. The young man was late for school and the principal ordered him to spend an hour in detention. The student did not report for detention, so the principal telephoned the boy's father and instructed him to get the son to the school right away. By the time the student arrived at the school, the principal had left and the superintendent had the young man sit in his outer office for a while and excused him from. detention. When a student from one of the lower class families refused to report for detention for having been tardy, the principal and superintendent hit the boy several times and insisted that he not return to school without his father. The incident resulted
165
in the young man quitting school.
Kerchhoff and Campbell (1977) found that disciplinary problems were related to both black and white educational attainment. Wilson (1979) concluded that the effects of disciplinary problems on academic attainment are more important in an integrated setting than in a segre-gated setting.
while it was hypothesized that participation in school activities would influence SPA, this was not the case. For whites, the correla-tion between SPA and participation in school activities is only .127. For blacks, the correlation between these two variables is higher (r = .332). There is a moderate correlation between participation in school activities and father's completion of a graduate or professional degree (r = .520). For whites, the correlation between the two vari-ables was also moderate (r = .305).
Student participation in extracurricular activities has also been found to be class related [Hollingshead (1949) and Sexton (1961)]. Sexton (1961) viewed participation in extracurricular activities as a good indication of how much student interest there is in the school. She stated that usually only the "successful" students who feel some attachment to the school tend to become involved in school activities, while students who feel alienated rarely participate in school activi-ties. Hollingshead (1949) found that upper class students dominated Elmtown High School's extracurricular activities. One hundred percent of the students in classes I and II were involved in extracurricular activities. Only 27% of students from the lowest class participated
166
in extracurricular activities.
There were no significant differences in the participation in extracurricular activities of whites, resident blacks, and Chapter 220 black students. All three groups were "somewhat involved" in school activities. White students were the least involved and resident blacks were the most involved. This finding appears to be inconsistent with the conclusions of other research.
Age, sex, and year in school also are not significantly related to student achievement although research indicates that black girls achieve at higher levels than black boys.
RACE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVE}D2Tr
-
Table 4.3 shows that race is a strong predictor of student achieve-ment. There is a moderate negative correlation between race (being black) and GPA (r = -.397). Beta is -.311. The unstandardized regres-sion coefficient is -.720 and is significant at the .01 level. This finding is consistent with the hypothesized relationship between race and achievement.
There are significant differences in the achievement of white and black students. The mean GPA for whites was 3.90 compared to a mean GPA for blacks of 2.98. An examination of GPA by conditions of attendance reveals that there are significant differences in the mean grade point averages of white and Chapter 220 students and resident black students. The results of a T-test show that the mean GPA of
167
Chapter 220 black students is 2.786 and the standard deviation is .662. For whites, the standard deviation is .926. At 150 degrees of freedom, the T-value is 5.81 and the 2-tail probability is .000. The mean GPA for resident black students is 3.489 and the standard deviation is .698. At 34 degrees of freedom, the T-value is -2.81 and the 2-tail probability is .008. Significant differences in GPA were not found between white and resident black students. At 134 degrees of freedom, the T-value is 1.36 and the 2-tail probability is .176.
For blacks, GPA is moderately correlated with involvement in extra-curricular activities, self-esteem, PTA meeting attendance, and con-ditions of attendance with correlations of .332, .335, .372, and .434, respectively. For whites, there were no significant correlations other than those reported in Table 4.4.
The variables in Table 4.4 accounted for approximately 40% of the variation in white student achievement. As Table 4.5 shows, however, over 70% of the variation in black student achievement is accounted for.
Discussion
-
Flost of the research that has investigated black and white achieve-ment has concluded that black students achieve at significantly lower levels than white students [Coleman (1966), Cohen, Pettigrew, and Riley (1972), Armor (1972), and Jencks (1972)]. Much of the research on the subject has concentrated on the reasons for the disparities between black and white achievement and ways to reduce or eliminate these
168
disparities. Sexton (1961) and Coleman (1966) indicated that the prob-lem of the low achievement of black students is severely compounded by differences in the socioeconomic and family environments of black and white students. The implication is that if disparities in these areas can be eliminated, differences in the achievement of the two groups can be reduced or eliminated. In such studies, the issue of present racial discrimination is often not considered as it should be.
Few,scholars continue to argue the position that blacks are gen-etically inferior.
Tables 4.4 and 4.5 show that different aspects of SES and family culture influence black and white achievement. Father's education is more important for white student achievement whereas mother's education is more important for black student achievement. Income predicts white student achievement but not black student performance. Parents' educa-tional aspirations predict white students' SPA but social participation is more important for black students.
Since different aspects of SES and family culture predict the achievement of black and white students, it may be more beneficial to examine the significant differences in the aspects of SES and family culture that influence black achievement for Chapter 220 students and resident black students. This has been done throughout this chapter.
TABLE 4.3
REGRESSION OF GPA ON MOTHER'S EDUCATION, FATHER'S EDUCATION, FATHER'S OCCUPATION, INCOME, PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, PARENTS' READING HABITS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL,FAMILY SIZE, AGE, SEX, SUSPENSIONS, EXTRA-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES, PREVIOUS SCHOOL STATUS, AND RACE FOR BLACKS AND WHITES.
B BETA CORREL A1URSQ T
(1) Father did not complete -.708 -.346 -.497 .242 -5.330**
(2) Race (Black) -.720 -.311 -.397 .310 -5.053**
(3) Mother completed at least 412 202 292 361 3.388**
a 4-year degree
(4) Number of suspensions -.461 -.213 -.251 .401 -3.643**
(5) Parents' educational 301 186 161 420 3.081**
aspirations
(6) Family size .101 .136 .103 .443 2.283*
(7) Family income of $50,000 .264 .134 .309 .455 2.187*
or more
(8) Public school attendance -.280 -.132 -.012 .468 -2.158*
N = 160, R2 = .495 ,_
*Significant at .05 level
**Significant at .01 level
TABLE 4.4
REGRESSION OF GPA ON MOTHER'S EDUCATION, FATt{ER'S EDUCATION, FATTIER'S OCCUPATION, INCOME, PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, PARENTS' READING HABITS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, FAMILY SIZE, AGE, SEX, SUSPENSIONS, EXTRA CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES, AND PREVIOUS SCHOOL STATUS FOR WHITES.
B RETA CORREL ArlJR.~1
(1) Father did not complete - 876 -.416 -.508
(2) Number of suspensions - .415 - .206 - .257
(3) Family income of S50,000 .360 - .192 .332
(4) Parents ' educational .293 .203 .255
(5) Family size .118 .170 .146
N = 124, R2 = .405
*Significant at .05 level
**Significant at .01 level
.252 - 5.599**
.291 - 2.875**
.326
.356
.380
2.596*
2.828** 2.370*
TABLE 4.S
REGRESSION OF SPA ON MalllER'S EDUCATION, FATIlER'S EDUCATION, FATHER'S OCCUPATION, INCOME, PARENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASPIRATIONS, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, PARENTS' READING lIABITS, SELF-ESTEEM, LOCUS OF CONTROL, FAMILY SIZE, ACE, SEX, SUSPENSIONS, EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITES, PREVIOUS SCI100L STATUS, AND CONDITIONS OF ATTENDANCE FOR BLACKS.
B BETA CORREL A~RSQ T
(1) Mother completed at least a .610 .397 .651 .406 3.822**
4-year degree
(2) Parents own home .710 .388 .552 .516 3.765**
(3) Number of suspensions -.597 -.324 -.370 .580 -3.379**
(4) Social participation .229 .279 .417 .642 2.906**
(5) Public school attendance -.407 -.270 -.146 .705 -.2775**
N = 36, R2 = .747
*Significant at .05 level
**Significant at .01 level
172
Summary
The basic propositions that: (1) academic achievement is in-fluenced by socioeconomic status, (2) academic achievement is influ-enced by family culture, (3) academic achievement is influenced by student characteristics, and (4) academic achievement is influenced by race, are generally supported.
Specifically, the hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and mother's education, father's education, income, social participation, parents' educational aspirations, race, suspensions, and private school attendance, were supported.
With the exception of suspensions, these relationships were not supported for whites and blacks. Mother's education is the strongest predictor of achievement for blacks whereas father's education is the strongest predictor of achievement for whites. Income influences white student achievement but not black student achievement. Social participation is positively associated with black student achievement but the family culture variable that influences white student achieve-ment is parents' educational aspirations. Private school attendance is positively associated with the academic achievement of black stu-dents.
The parents of Chapter 220 students may very well have attitudes and values concerning education that are significantly different than those of many blacks. The fact that they chose to send their children to an upper middle class suburban school supports this contention. It
173
may be more accurate to view the black parents in the study in terms of a continuum of class status rather than as two distinct groups.
The two groups of blacks differed significantly in several respects. The self-esteem of resident black partents was significantly higher than that of the parents of Chapter 220 black students. Resident black parents were more interenally controlled and had a higher frequencey of reading books for pleasure.
The academic achievement of white students was significantly higher than that of blacks as a group; however, it was not significantly higher than the achievement of resident black students. The achieve-ment of Chapter 220 black students was significantly lower than that of resident black students.
The hypothesized relationships between academic achievement and father's occupational status, self-esteem, locus of control, PTA meet-ing-.attendance, parents' reading habits, and student involvement in extracurricular activities were not supported.
~ v
FINDINGS LN~ INTERPRETATIONS
174
1
The principal objective of this research was an examination of the role of parental status and behavior on student achievement. More specifically, the investigation concentrated on identifying the aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that influence academic achievement and analyzing the differential aspects of these influences on black and white student performance in an upper middle class majority white school. More about the relevancy of the setting and the circumstances under which most of the black students attend Nicolet will be discussed shortly. The effects of student status and behavioral char-acteristics were also examined. The rationale for selecting two of the student characteristics, participation in extracurricular activities and number of suspensions is that these characteristics can be influ-enced by families. Participation in extracurricular activities involves investments in time and sometimes money. The extent to which students are involved in extracurricular activities also reflects their status within the school. Number of suspensions may reflect parental stress on self-discipline, promptness, and respect for authority.
Generally the findings pertaining to the relationship between
achievement and socioeconomic status are as follows:
(1) white student achievement is positively associated with higher
levels of father's education
(2) white student achievement is positively associated with higher
i
175
family income levels
(3) white student achievement is positively associated with family
size
(4) black student achievement is positively associated with higher
levels of mother's education
(4) black student achievement is positively associated with home
ownership
The findings pertaining to the relationship between parents' education and academic achievement are consistent with Coleman's (1966) conclusion that parents' education has the highest relation to achieve-ment for nearly all groups in later years. The findings are also con-sistent with those of Surname, Maynard, and Ohl (1980). They found that black mothers who completed high school were more successful in helping children acquire cognitive skills. They suggested that since the effects of mother's education greatly exceeded those of father's education, it is likely that the mother's education influences patterns of child care which in turn affects achievement. Family income was not found to be consistently related to black student achievement.
Why do different aspects of SES influence black and white student achievement? The most plausible explanation is that father's education influences income which in turn influences residential patterns. The white students in the study have had access to the better suburban schools.
The findings pertaining to family culture are as follows: (1) parents' educational aspirations are positively associated with
1
176
white student achievement. (2) family size is positively associated with white student achievement. (3) social participation is positively associated with black student achievement.
These findings, with the exception of the one pertaining to family size, are consistent with the literature.
The variables used to represent family culture are more highly correlated for blacks than for whites. If characteristics of families must be significantly related in order to truly represent family culture, then the variables employed were not very representative of family culture for whites. The family characteristics investigated do, how-ever, appear to represent family culture for blacks. Black family culture may be different from that of whites. Although there were no significant differences between black and white self-esteem, locus of control, social participation, and parents reading habits, there is obviously a difference in the relative importance of these variables for black and white student achievement and possibly for status attain-ment. Ogbu (1981) argued that the general failure of efforts to improve the academic performance of black is in part due to the assumptions of social scientists that school performance depends on the home environment, the school environment, and genetic endowment. He further contended that blacks have their own culture with its own child-rearing practices and that schools do not recognize these differences and therefore do not instruct and test in manners consistent with the culture of black children.
177
It is also possible that parents' self-esteem is more important for black student achievement than for white student achievement. The aspects of family culture that influenced black and white student achievement were both most highly correlated with self-esteem. The data suggests that there may be an indirect relationship between academic achievement and parents' self-esteem. Further, locus of control was the strongest predictor of self-esteem for blacks and whites. In light of Coleman's (19663 contentions that: (1) mothers' sense of control may affect childrens' cognitive skills and sense of control, (2) school integration increases minority students sense of control but decreases their self-esteem, and (3) minority student achievement appears closely related to the child's sense of control, the relationship between academic achievement and parents' self-esteem and locus of control in the context of interracial schools should be further examined.
One important conclusion that can be drawn from these findings is that white student achievement appears to be more influenced by income related factors than black student achievement. This conclusion has im-portant policy implications in light of large differences in black and white income. It can be interpreted as an indication that black student achievement can be increased without necessarily increasing black income levels. Caution should be used, however, in policy decisions based on this interpretation. Since money influences
.
178
access to higher education and home ownership, decreasing the income differential between blacks and whites remains important. Another is that black family culture appears to be different from that of whites. This must be taken into consideration if equality in educational °2-portunity is to be attained. Thirdly, different components of SES influence black and white achievement.
These findings and conclusions must be considered in the proper context. The study is limited by the fact that the achievement of students at only one school was investigated. Further, the parents of Chapter 220 students may represent a select group in terms of atti-tudes and values. Thirdly, since the setting of the study was an interracial school, scholars may look at the implications of these findings for interracial schooling, however, increased academic achieve-ment is only one of the possible outcomes of interracial schooling. Improved race relations and exposure to the dominant attitudes and values of American society may also result from interracial schooling.
179
CHAPTER NOTES
CHAPTER I
1. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, "A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration" (1983), p. 1.
2. David J. Armor, "School and Family Effects on Black and White Achievement: A Reexamination of the USOE Data," in Frederick Mosteller and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Gpoortunity (New York: Random House, 1972), p. 17Z.
3. Nancy H. St. John, "Desegregation, Voluntary or Mandatory," Inte-grated Education, Vol. 10, No. 55-60 (1972), pp. 9-10.
4. United States Select Senate Committee on Equal Educational Oppor-tunity, Toward Equality of Educational Opportunity (New York: AMS Press, 1974), p. 25.
5. The aim of voluntary city/suburban plans has not been to attain racial blanace district-wide. Such programs have not been employed as legal remedies to illegal school segregation.
6. W. H. Burton, "Education and Social Class in the United States, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 23, No. 4 (1953), p. 244.
7. Ibid., p. 246.
8. Lloyd W. Warner, Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated' (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944), p. 4377~
9. Ibid., p. 48.
10. Ibid., p. 48.
11. Ibid., p. 248.
12. Edward 8. Tylor, Primitive Culture (New York, publ. unknown, 1889), p. 1.
13. A. L. Kroeber, The Nature of Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952), p. 157.
14. Ibid., p. 132.
15. Ibid., p. 132.
16. Alan B. Wilson, "Residential Segregation of Social Classes and
180
Aspirations of High School Boys," in T. Bentley Edwards and Edward M. Wirt, School Desegregation in the North (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co., 1967), p. 156.
17. Edward C. Banfield, The Unheavenly City (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1970), p. 49.
18. James S. Coleman, et al, Equality of Educational Opportunity (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966), p. 321.
19. Ibid., p. 321.
20. Ruth C Wylie, The Self-Concept (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1979), p. 30.
21. Carl C. Jorgensen, "Internal-External Control in the Academic Achievement of Black Youth: A Re-Appraisal," Integrated Education, Vol. 14, No. 6 (1979), p. 22.
22. Ibid., p. 22.
23. R. B. Burns, The Self Concept (New York: Longman, Inc., 1979), p. 5.
24. Ibid., pp. 7-8.
25. Ibid., p. 9.
26. Morris Rosenberg, Society and the Adolescent Self-Image (Prince-ton: Princeton University Press, 1965), p. 30.
27. Ibid., p. 31.
28. Norris Rosenberg, Conceiving the Self (New York: Basic Books, 1979), P
29. Julian B. Rotter, "External Control and Internal Control," Psy-chologv Today (June 1971), p. 37.
30. Julian B. Rotter, "Generalized Expectancies for Internal Versus External Control," Psychological Monographs, Vol. 80, No. 1 (1971), p. 1.
181
CHAPTER NOTES
CHAPTER II
1. Alan B. Wilson, The Conseauences of
dessary Press, 1969), p. 6. ~
2. Ibid., p. 27.
3. Ibid., p. 28.
ion (Berkeley: Glen-
4. Robert E. Herriott and Nancy H. St. John, Social Class and the Urban School (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1966), p. 7.
5. Ibid., p. 22.
6. Ibid., p. 18.
7. Ibid., p. 47.
8. James S. Coleman (et al), Equality of Educational Opportunity (U.S. Department of Heiith; Education, and Welfare: U.S; Government Printing Office, 1966), p. 305.
9. Ibid., p. 307.
10. Christopher Jencks, Inequality (New York: Basic Books, 1972),
11. Ibid., p. 30.
12. Ibid., pp. 32-33.
13. David K. Cohen, Thomas F. Pettigrew, and Robert T. Riley, '[Race and Outcomes of Schooling," in Frederick Mosteller and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Opportunity (New York: Random House, 1972), p. 345.
14. Ibid., p. 347.
IS. T. Bentley Edwards and Frederick M. Wirt, School Desegregation in the North (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co., 1967], pp. 155-156.
16. Alan B. Wilson, "Residential Segregation of Social Classes and Aspirations of High School Boys," in Edwards and Wirt (eds.), School Desegregation in the North (1959), p. 159.
: ~O on
~ ·~] Ptlicy ~ , No ~ 7.
urban Y M 7dep9 ''Eouca
Vol. ls An Evalu ti Children in
2 (1971), p. 175 ~ Social Pev-~ Sub~
Crain and Mahn-~ tt^--
182
~ - _-~ ~ "~ _rS ! ~lul~y,
ment H -~~ ~ ~ ·~'nara ~ °ndSchoo1 DeS ~ tion and Achieve-An EValuPtionEd~ucpatiln8g DisadVantaged Urb Ch
~ 1eVdi sSCh(s°°1 Intlegg8r3)ion a8nd Its Academic Critics," Civi
Voi 2D8aVi(5d J. Armor, ' e Evid
1972), pp. 1os-l06 USin, The Public Interest
grated Educationusevm ,~hite Students a d
_ _ ~ oi 10 (september, ~ tOberkeln98D3e)segregastion," Inte-
hi W. Mahan, "Changes in Co ni
~ (JanUary-Fenbschool5 on Ign-er-VceitStYle:
25. Ibid., p. 59
26. Ibid., p. 60
, . _V. --=ry lY70), p. 59.
27. ~ . g vfOIStu3d7ents for Equal °Pportu i
8. Ibid., p. 297.
9e yanCy H- St- John ~
'Dhe ~ t197 ~ o~o~l~Desegregation
31t Herman R. Goldberg ~
grated EdUCati°n, Vol. 4 NOP°l2it(aA Pillan~ing for EducatiOn ..
183
32. Ibid., p. 38.
33. Ibid., p. 38.
34. Ibid., p. 38.
35. Ibid., p. 39.
36. Joseph M Samuels, "Busing, Reading, and Self in New Haven," Integrated Education, Vol. 10 (Nov.-Dec., 1972), p. 23.
37. Ibid., p. 26.
38. Ibid., p. 24.
39. Dennis J. Conta, The East Shore District Plan: A City Suburban Merger Proposal by Dennis Conta (Milwaukee: East Shore Committee for OuaIity Education, 1975), p. 2.
40. Miriam G. Palay, Chapter 220: Student Exchanges Between City and Suburb--The Milwaukee Experience (Milwaukee: University of Rlsconsin-Milwaidcee, Urban Observatory, 1Y78), p. 11.
41. William J. Kritek, "Voluntary Desegregation in Wisconsin," Inte-grated Education, Vol. 15, No. 6 (Nov.-Dee. 1977), p. 85.
42. Ibid., p. 85.
43. Adapted from Table 1 in Palay, Chapter 220: Student Exch dig s Between City and Suburb--The Milwaukee Experience, p. 31.
44. Adapted from Tables 3 and 4 in Palay, Chapter 220: Student Ex-changes Between City and Suburb--The Milwaukee Experience, pp. 38-39.
45. Patricia Cayo Sexton, Education and Income (New York: Viking Press, 1961), p. 10.
46. Jencks, Inequality, p. 77.
47. Sexton, Education and Income, p. 11.
48. George Clement Bond, "Social Economic Status and Educational Achievement: A Review Article," Anthropology and Education Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 4 (1981), p. 229.
49. Jencks, Inequality, p. 78.
50. Barbara K. Iverson and Herbert J. Walberg, 'Rome Environment and School Learning: A Quantitative Synthesis," Journal of Experimental
184
_ ucation, Vol. 50, No. 3 (1982), p. 145.
51. Kevin Marjoribanks, "Family Environments," in Herbert J. Walberg (ed.), Educational Environments and Effects (Berkeley: McClutchan Publishing Corp., 1979), p. 17. ~
52. Ibid., p. 18.
53. Iverson and Walberg, "Home Environment and School Learning: A Quantitative Synthesis," p. 145.
54. Ibid., p. 155.
55. Ibid., p. 155.
56. August B. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1949), p. 176.
57. Lloyd W. Warner, Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated? (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944), p. 53.
58. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth, p. 176.
59. Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated?, p. 74.
60. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth, p. 29.
61. Ibid., p. 84.
62. Ibid., p. 88.
63. Ibid., p. 172.
64. Adapted from Table 3.221.3 in Coleman et al, Equality of Educa-tional Opportunity, p. 300.
65. Ibid., p. 301.
66. Arnor, "School and Family Effects on Black and White Achievement: A Reexamination of the USOE Data," p. 172.
67. Ibid., p. 168.
68. Ibid., p. 209.
69. Ibid., pp. 203-204.
70. Ibid., adapted from Table on p. 213.
185
71. Kenneth L. Wilson, "The Effects of Integration and Class on Black Educational Attainment," Sociology of Education, Vol. 52 (April 1979), p. 86.
72. Karl R. White, "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 91, No. 3 (~day 1982), p. 462.
73. Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated?, p. 51.
74. Ibid., p. S2.
75. Sexton, Education and Income, pp. 23-25.
76. Ibid., p. 27.
77. Ibid., p. 151.
78. Ibid., p. 16.
79. George Clement Bond, "Social Economic Status and Educational Achievement: A Review Article," p. 240.
80. Ibid., p. 245.
81. Ibid., p. 253.
82. Karl R. White, "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement," p. 463.
83. Ibid., p. 464.
84. Ibid., p. 464.
85. Ibid., pp. 465-466.
86. Ibid., p. 474.
87. Ibid., p. 475.
88. Ibid., p. 475.
89. Thomas Kellaghan, "Relationships Between Home Environment and Scholastic Behavior in a Disadvantaged Population," Journal of Edu-cational Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 6 (1977), p. 754.
90. George Clement Bond, "Social Economic Status and Educational Achievement: A Review Article," p. 242.
186
91. Charles A. Valentine, "The Culture of Poverty: Its Scientific Significance and Its Implications for Action," in Eleanor Leacock (ed.), The Culture of Poverty: A Critique (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971), p. 132.
92. Ibid., p. 207.
93. Ibid., p. 207.
94. Ibid., p. 207.
95. Ibid., p. 211.
96. White, "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Aca-demic Achievement," p. 463.
97. Kellaghan, "Relationships Between Home Environment and Scholastic Behavior in a Disadvantaged Population," p. 756.
98. Zena Smith Blau, Black Children/White Children (New York: The Free Press, 1981), p. 96.
99. Ibid., p. 98.
100. Ibid., p. 98.
101. Ibid., p. 85.
187
CHAPTER NOTES
CHAPTER III
1. Theodore V. Montgomery, Jr., School Desegreation Planning, Mil-waukee 1976 Chronology, Plans, and Participants (Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1~9, p. 590.
2. Ibid., p. 593.
3. Pamela J. Sampson, Ontions: School Desegregation Milwaukee: Uni-versity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1976), p. 61.
4. Ibid., p. 61.
5. Ibid., p. 61.
6. Ibid., p. 54.
7. Montgomery, Jr., "School Desegregation Planning, Milwaukee 1976 Chronology, Plans, and Participants," p. 375.
8. Ibid., p. 375.
9. Ibid., p. 376.
10. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration (Milwaukee, 1983), p.
11. Letter to the Milwaukee Board of School Directors, October 26, 1983.
12. Office of the Superintendent of Schools, letter to the Milwaukee Board of School Directors, October 26, 1983, p. 1.
13. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration, p. 1.
14. Ibid., p. 6.
15. Ibid., p. 6.
16. Ibid., p. 7.
17. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, May 10, 1984, proposal to suburban districts, p. 3.
18. Ibid., p. 4.
188
19. Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, "The Suburban/ Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Positive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities for Milwaukee and Suburban Students" clay 31, 1984), p. 3.
20. United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, Suit filed by the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee (June 28, 1984), p. 8.
21. Ibid., p. 2.
22. Ibid., p. 2.
23. Ibid., pp. 11-12.
24. Ibid., p. 17.
Ibid., p. 20.
26. The Shorewood School District has been involved in a number of student exchange programs including A Better Chance (ABC) and American Field Service International (AFS). Under the ABC program, minority students lived with families in the area and attended Shorewood High School. AFS is an international exchange program.
27. The means and standard deviations for this variable were computed utilizing the original categories with the exception of (9) other--please specify.
28. The means and standard deviations for this variable were computed utilizing the original categories with the exception of (9) other--please specify.
29. In order to interpret the means for this variable, one should look at the North-Hatt occupational prestige index. A score of 66, for ex-ample, generally indicates that an individual is employed in a profes-sional occupation. The NORC score for college professors is 82.
30. The means and standard deviations for this variable were computed utilizing the original categories.
31. Norman H. Nie and C. Handlai Hull, SPSS Update 7-9 (New York: McGraw-Hill Publishers, 1981), p. 249.
189
GlUPTER NOTES
CHAPTER TV
1. August B. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth (New York. Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1949), p. 187.
190
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Armor, David J. "The Evidence on Busing," The Public Interest, Vol. 28, No. 90 (Summer, 1972): 91-126.
. "School and Family Effects on Black and White Achievement," in Frederick Mosteller and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Opportunity. New York: Random House, 1972.
Banfield, Edward C. The Unheavenly City. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1970.
Battle, Ester S. and Julian B. Rotter. "Children's Feelings of Per-sonal Control as Related to Social Class and Ethnic Group," Journal of Personality, Vol. 31 (1963): 482-490.
Bernstein, Basil. "Social Class and Linguistic Development: A Theory of Social Learning," in A. H. Halsey, I. Floud, and C. A. Anderson (eds.), Education, Economy and Society, 1961.
Blau, Zena Smith. Black Children/White Children. New York: The Free Press, 1981.
Bloom, B. S. Stability and Change in Human Characteristics. New York: Wiley, 1964. ~
Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee. A Proposal for Increasing Metropolitan School Integration. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1983.
Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee. The Suburban/ Milwaukee Plan for Cooperation Between School Districts: A Posi-tive Alternative for Improving the Educational Opportunities For Milwaukee and Suburban Students. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1984.
Bond, George Clement. "Social Economic Status and Educational Achieve-ment: A Review Article," Anthropology and Education Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 4 (1981): 227-257.
Bossard, James H. S., and Eleanor Stokes Boll. The Sociology of Child Development. New York: Harper and Row, 1966.
Bradley, Lawrence A., and Gifford W. Bradley. "The Academic Achievement of Black Students in Desegregated Schools: A Critical Review," Review of Educational Research, Vol. 47, No. 3 (1977): 399-449.
Burns, R. B. The Self-Concept. New York: Longman, Inc., 1979.
191
Burton, W. H. "Education and Social Class in the United States," Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 23, No. 2 (1953): 543-551.
Claeys, Willem and Paul De Boeck. "The Influence of Some Parental Characteristics on Children's Primary Abilities and Field Inde-pendence: A Study of Adopted Children," Child Development, Vol. 47 (1976): 842-845.
Cohen, David K., Thomas F. Pettigrew, and Robert T. Riley. "Race and Outcomes of Schooling," in Frederick losteller and Daniel P. t10ynihan (eds.), On Equality of Educational Opportunity. New York: Random House, l§72.
Coleman, James S. et al. The Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, Din.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Conta, Dennis J. The East Shore District Plan: A City-Suburban Merger Proposal by Dennis Conta. Milwaukee: East Shore Committee for Quality Education, 1975.
Coopersmith, Stanley. The Antecedents of Self-Esteem. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1967.
Cox, Oliver C. Caste, Class and Race. New York: Doubleday, 1948.
Crain, Robert L. and Rita E. Mayhard. "Desegregation and Black Achieve-ment: A Review of the Research," Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 42, too. 3 (1978): 17-56.
. "Research on School Desegrega-tion and Achievement: How to Combine Scholarship and Policy Relevance," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 1, No. 4 (July-August, 1979).
Dave, William I., and E. Jerry Phares. "Parental Antecedents of In-ternal Control of R Enforcement," Psychological Reports, Vol. 24 (1969): 427-436.
Davis, Allison. Social Class Influences on Learning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1948.
Dolan, Lawrence J. "Home, School and Pupil Attitudes," Evaluation in Education: An International Review Series, Vol. 4, No. 3 (1980): 267-358.
Bunnell, J. P. Input and Output Analysis of Suburban Elementary School Districts. Association Meetings, New York, February, 1971.
192
Edwards, T. Bentley and Frederick M. Wirt. School Desegregation in the North. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co.,--1967.
Epps, Edgar. "The Impact of School Desegregation on Aspirations, Self-Concept, and Other Aspects of Personality," Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 39, No. 2 (Spring, 1975):300-313.
Fisher, Sethard. "Race, Class, Anomie, and Academic Achievement: A Study at the High School Level," Urban Education, Vol. 16, No. 2 (July, l9Sl):149-173.
Gibson, Jesse. "Affective Parent Education in Philadelphia." United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Institute of Education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Print-ing Office, 1978.
Gigliotti, Richard J. "Residential Stability and Academic Sense of Control," Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 6, No. 3 Ddarch, 1976):
Goldberg, Herman R. 'metropolitan Plannung for Integration," Integrated Education, Vol. 4, No. 2 (April-May, 1966):36-42.
Good, Suzanne. "Parental Antecedents of Children's Internal Control of Reinforcements in Intellectual Achievement Situations," Child Development, Vol. 38, No. 3 (1967):765-776.
Gordon, Vivian Verdell. The Self-Concept of Black Americans. Landham: University Press of America, Inc., 1980.
Gurin, Patricia, Gerald Gurin, Rosina C. Lao, and Muriel Beattie. "Internal External Control in the Motivational Dynamics of Negro Youth," Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 25 (1969):29-53.
Havighurst, Robert J. and Daniel Levine. Society and Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1979.
Herriott, Robert E. and Nancy Hoyt St. John. Social Class and the Urban School. New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966.
Hollingshead, August B. Elmtown's Youth. New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1949.
Hull, C. Hadlai and Norman H. Nie. SPSS Update 7-9. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishers, 1981.
193
Iverson, Barbara K. and Herbert J. Walberg. "Home Environment and School Learning: A Quantitative Synthesis," Journal of Experi-mental Education, Vol. 50, No. 3 (Spring, 1982): 144-151.
Jencks, Christopher. Inequality. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1972.
Jorgensen, Carl C. "Internal-External Control in the Academic Achieve-ment of Black Youth: A Re-Appraisal," Integrated Education, Vol 14, No. 6 (November-December 1976): 20-23.
Katz, Irwin. "The Socialization of Academic Motivation in Minority Group Children," in David Levine (ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967.
Reeves, John P. "Educational Environment and Student Achievement," in Kevin Marjoribanks (ed.), Environments for Learning. Windsor, Berks: NFER Publishing Co., 1972.
Kellaghan, Thomas. "Relationships Between Home Environment and Schol-astic Behavior in a Disadvantaged Population," Journal of Educa-tional Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 6 (1977): 754-760.
Kohn, Melvin L. Class and Conformity: A Studv in Values. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Press, 1969.
Kritek, William J. "Voluntary Desegregation in Wisconsin," Integrated Education, Vol. 15, No. 6 (Nov.-Dee. 1977): 83-87.
Kroeber, A. L. The Nature of Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952.
Leacock, Eleanor Burke (ed.). The Culture of Poverty. New York: Simon and Shuster, 1971.
Lesser, Gerald, Gordon Fifer, and Donald H. Clark. '[dental Abilities of Children from Different Social Class and Cultural Groups," Fionographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Vol. 30, No. 4 (1965). ~
Lewis, Oscar. "The Culture of Poverty," Scientific American, Vol. 215 (1966): 19-25.
Mahan, Aline M. and Thomas W. Mahan. "Changes in Cognitive Style: An Analysis of the Impact of White Suburban Schools on Inner C ty Children," Integrated Education (January-F bruary, 1970): 58-61.
.
Mahan, Thomas W. 'rOhe Busing of Students for Equal Opportunities," Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 37, No. 3 (1968): 291-300.
194
and Aline M. Mahan. "The Impact of Schools on Learning: Inner-City Children in Suburban Schools," Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1971): 1-11.
Malone, Pamela J. "Race, Class, and School Desegregation." Paper presented at the Midwest Sociological Society Annual Meetings, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, April 3-8, 1980.
Marjoribanks, Kevin. "Academic Achievement: Family Size and Social Class," in Kevin Marjoribanks (ed.), Environments for Learning. Windsor, Berks: NFER Publishing Co., 1974.
. Environments for Learning. Windsor, Berks: NFER Publishing Co., 1974.
. Ethnic Families and Children's Achievement. Sidney: George Allen and Unwin Publishers, 1980.
. "Family Environments," in Herbert Walberg (ed.), Educational Environments and Effects. Berkeley: McCutchan Pub-lishing Corp., 1979.
McAdoo, Harriet Pipes (ed.). Black Families. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
. "Components of Educational Achievement and Mobility in Black Families." Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association [ketings, New York, New York, April 3-8, 1977.
McDonald, A. P., Jr. "Internal-External Locus of Control: Parental Antecedents," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 37, No. 1 (1971): 141-147.
Montgomery, Theodore V., Jr. School Desegregation Planning, Milwaukee 1976 ChronologY, Plans, and Participants. Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1979.
Miller, Delbert. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. (3rd ed.). New York: David McKay Company, 1977.
Mosteller, Frederick and Daniel P. Moynihan (eds.). On Equality of Educational Opportunity. New York: Random House, 1972.
Murname, Richard J., Rebecca A. Maynard, and James C. Olds. "Home Re-sources and Children's Achievement," Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 63, No. 3 (August 1981): 369-76.
Murphy, Frank. Interview based on unpublished paper submitted for graduate course work at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (1983)
195
The National Commission on Excellence in Education. A Nation at Risk. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983.
Orfield, Gary. "School Integration and Its Academic Critics," Civil Rights Digest, Vol. 5 (Summer 1983): 2-10.
Palay, Miriam G. Chapter 220, Student Exchanges Between City and Sub-urb--The Milwaukee Experience. Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1978.
Rose, Harold M. Black Suburbanization. Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing Company, 1976.
Rossi, Peter H. "Social Factors in Academic Achievement: A Brief Review," in A. H. Halsey, I. Floud, and C. Anderson (ads.), Edu-cation, Economy and Society. New York: Free Press, 1961.
, William A. Sampson and Christine E. Bose, et al. "Measuring Household Social Standing," Social Science~kesearch, Vol. 3 (1974): 169-190.
Rotter, Julian B. "Generalized Expectancies for Internal vs. External Control of Reinforcement," Psychological Monographs, Vol. 80, No. 1 (1966): 1-28.
. "External and Internal Control," Psychology Today, Vol. 5, No. 1 (June 1971): 37-59.
Rosenberg, Morris. Occupations and Values. Glencoe: The Free Press, 1957.
. Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton: - Princeton University Press, 1965.
York: Basic Books, Inc., 1979.
and Roberta G. Simmons. Black and White Self-Esteem: The Urban School Child. Washington, D.C.: American Sociolotical Association, i971.
Conceiving the Self. New
and Leonard I. Pearlin. "Social Class and SelfEsteem Among Children and Adults," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 84, No. 1 (1978): 53-77.
Sampson, Pamela J. Options: School Desegregation. Milwaukee: Uni-
versity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Urban Observatory, 1976.
196
Sampson, William A. and Ben Williams. "School Desegregation: The Non-Traditional Sociological Perspective," Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Winter, 1978): 72-87.
Samuels, Joseph. "Busing, Reading, s d Self in New Haven," Integrated Education, Vol. 10 (November-December 1972): 23-28.
Seginer, Rachel. "Parents' Educational Expectations s d Children's Academic Achievement" A Literature Review," Merrill-Palmer Quar-terly, Vol. 29, No. 1 (1983): 1-23.
Sexton, Patricia Cayo. Education and Income. New York: The Viking Press, 1961. ~
Slaughter, Diana T. "The Relationship of Early Parent-Teacher Sociali-zation Influences to Achievement Orientation and Self-Esteem in Middle Childhood Among Low Income Black Children." Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development Biennial Meetings, Denver, Colorado, April 10-13, 1975.
Sowell, Thomas. Race and Economics. New York: Longman Publ., 1975.
St. John, Nancy H. "Desegregation, Voluntary or Mandatory," Integrated Education, Vol. 10, No. 55-60 (1972): 7-16.
. "The Elementary Classroom as a Frog Pond: SelfConcept, Sense of Control, and Social Context," Social Forces, Vol. 49, No. 4 (June 1971): 581-595.
.
School Desegregation: Outcomes for Children. New
York: Wiley and Sons, 1975.
Tylor, Edward B. Primitive Culture. 1889 (publ. unknown).
United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin. Suit filed by the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee, 1984.
United States Select Senate Committee on Equal Educational Opportunity. Toward Equal Educational Opportunity. New York: AMS Press, Inc.,
Useem, Elizabeth. 'Lucite Students and Token Desegregation," Integrated Education, Vol. 10 (September-October 1983): 46-54.
Valentine, Charles A. "The Culture of Poverty: Its Scientific Sig-nificance and Its Implications for Action," in Eleanor Leacock (ed.), The Culture of P~verty3~]ag]5~. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971.
197
Walberg, Herbert J. (ed.). Educational Environments and Effects. Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing Corp., 1979.
and Kevin Marjoribanks. "Family Environment and Cognitive Development," Review of Educational Research, Vol. 46, No. 4 (1976): 527-555. ~
Warner, Lloyd W., Robert J. Havighurst, and Martin B. Loeb. Who Shall Be Educated? New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944.
Weinberg, Meyer. "The Relationship Between School Desegregation and Academic Achievement: A Review of the Research," Law and Contem-porary Problems, Vol. 39, No. 2 (1975): 241-278.
White, Karl R. "The Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 91, No. 3 (May 1982): 461-481.
Wilson, Alan B. The Consequences of Segregation: Academic Achievement in a Northern Community. Berkeley: Glendary Press, 1969.
. "Residential Segregation of Social Classes and Aspirations of High School Boys," in T. Bentley Edwards and Frederick M. Wirt (ads.), School Desegregation in the North. San Francisco Chandler Publishing Co., 1959.
Wilson, Kenneth L. "The Effects of Integration and Class on Black Edu-cational Attainment," Sociology of Education, Vol. 52 (April 1979):
Wilson, William J. The Declining Significance of Race. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.
Wylie, Ruth C. The Self-Concept (Volume 2). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1979.
Zdep, Stanley M. "Educating Disadvantaged Urban Children in Suburban Schools: An Evaluation," Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 2 (1971): 173-186.
VITA (Ph.D.)
TITLE OF THESIS: Socioeconomic Status, Family Culture, and Academic
Achievement: A Study of Black and White Pupil
Performance at an Interracial School
FULL NAME: Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
PLACE AND DATE OF BIRTH: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, February 17, 1953
COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
YEARS ATTENDED AND DEGREES:
Lakeland College, 1970-1974, Bachelor of Arts
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 1975-1976,
Master of Science
PUBLICATIONS: Options: School Desegregation. Milwaukee Urban
Observatory, UWM (1976)
MAJOR DEPARTMENT: Urban Social Institutions
SPECIALIZATION: Race and Ethnicity
DATE:
SIGNED: P fies in charge f he
0 t 515
h~ fJ 1995
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL
by
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
A Thesis Submitted in partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Urban Social Institutions
at
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
May 1985
Major Professor
Dr. Harold M. Rose
5/8 /85
Date
Graduate School Approval
Date
http://leontodd.blogspot.com/2010/12/chapter-220-milwaukee-inter-district.html
E-mail:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
