Fossil Fuel Oil is running out. Officials Wake Up to Peak Oil. The End of Peak Oil Denial

Officials Wake Up to Peak Oil, Part 1

The End of Peak Oil Denial

By Chris Nelder
Friday, April 2, 2010

When I began writing about peak oil professionally in 2006, it was generally considered a tinfoil hat theory. The notion that oil production might peak around 2012, plus or minus, was only taken seriously by a few analysts who were considered extremely pessimistic.

Official forecasts had no cognizance of it whatsoever. All were confident that oil supply would continue to grow steadily to 130 million barrels per day (mbpd) and beyond, at prices that would be considered astoundingly cheap by today’s standards. Oil companies rarely mentioned peak oil, and when they did, it was in a casually dismissive way.

But as time marched on, the cornucopian arguments fell one by one. My longtime readers have seen the story unfold, but for the benefit of new readers, here’s a quick summary.

Forecasts grew more and more pessimistic as it became apparent that regular conventional crude supply had peaked at the end of 2004. Even as the biggest oil price spike in history ensued from 2005-2008, crude production remained flat and unresponsive.

OPEC scaled back some of its development plans as costs soared. Non-OPEC production not only failed to deliver any actual increase, but began to decline. Forecasts were revised lower.

Corn ethanol boomed and busted, as it was revealed to be the net energy non-starter that serious analysts always knew it was. It also was suspected of adding pressure to food prices at a most inopportune time.

Unconventional production from oil shale and tar sands failed to grow as expected, as producers shied away from high-cost, low-production projects.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) finally included the depletion of mature fields in its analysis, and became increasingly shrill in its warnings about future supply.

A few current and former oil industry executives began making public statements about the diminishing prospects for new supply, and a few even acknowledged that it would be hard to increase production much beyond current levels.

Then high oil prices proved intolerable to an economy stretched thin by the bursting of the bubbles in the real estate and financial sectors.

Yet official recognition of the peak oil threat remained muted, couched in warnings about “adequate investment” and blithe assertions that demand would soon peak, averting any supply shortage.

All that seems to have changed in the last month. A sudden deluge of reports and summit meetings suggest that the oil industry and energy officials are now taking peak oil very seriously indeed.

UK Task Force on Peak Oil: Shortages by 2015

The first bombshell was actually dropped on February 10, when the UK Industry Task Force on Peak Oil and Energy Security issued a report called “The Oil Crunch: A wake-up call for the UK economy.” I only mentioned it in passing at the time, but it was a stern warning that “oil shortages, insecurity of supply and price volatility will destabilise economic, political, and social activity potentially by 2015.”

It only made the news because Sir Richard Branson personally endorsed it, but the fact that the task force comprised top UK executives and energy experts lent it enough weight to be rather widely circulated in the press.

The British government, including energy minister Lord Hunt, responded by staging a closed-door summit meeting with the taskforce on March 22. As the UK’s Guardian reported, the government intended to develop an action plan to contend with a near-term peak, and to “calm rising fears over peak oil.”

Veteran peak oil analyst and taskforce member Jeremy Leggett explained: “Government has gone from the BP position – ‘40 years of supply left, the price mechanism works, no need to worry’ – to ‘crikey’.” He urged the assembly to properly assess the risks of peak oil, and to immediately begin preparing for the end of globalization and an era of oil shortages in the West.

According to reports from attendees, the summit yielded some important conclusions:

Peak oil is either here, or close enough.
Prices will have to go higher as demand outstrips supply.
Governments will be forced to intervene to maintain critical levels of oil supply, and limit volatility.
Rationing measures may be unavoidable.
Electrification of transport must be pursued in order to reduce demand.
Communities will need to work quickly to reorganize around walking instead of driving, producing food and energy locally instead of importing, and generally try to reduce their need for oil.
However, the notion that peak oil will mean the end of economic growth, as I have argued, apparently fell on deaf ears. Still, the very fact that the government has engaged with the peak oil community and formed a parliamentary group to study the issue offers a sliver of hope that, at least in the UK, we’ll have some measure of consciousness about the issue and an idea of what to do about it as we drive off the peak oil cliff.

Kuwait Report: Peak by 2014

The next was a report that surfaced around March 12. Three authors from the College of Engineering and Petroleum at Kuwait University had applied advanced mathematics to reserve and production data for the top 47 oil producing countries using a multi-cycle Hubbert model, which demonstrated a much better fit to historical data than single-cycle Hubbert Curve analyses.

The model estimates the world’s ultimate crude oil production at 2140 billion barrels, with 1161 billion barrels remaining to produce as of the end of 2005. It forecast that world production would peak in 2014 around 79 mbpd. The annual depletion rate of world reserves was estimated to be around 2.1%.

The results weren’t really news to the peakists, for they matched up quite well with the models of Colin Campbell, Jean Laherrère and other analysts who have warned about peak oil since 1995. What made this report interesting was that first, it was from Kuwait, and second, it brought a new level of mathematical rigor to the study.

The model indicated that non-OPEC production peaked in 2006 at 39.6 mbpd. It forecasts that OPEC production will peak in 2026 at 53 mbpd, up from 31 mbpd in 2005, with the majority of the increase coming from Iraq, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. Then OPEC production is expected to decline to 29 mbpd by 2050.

Oxford Report: Reserves Exaggerated by One Third

On March 22, another bombshell exploded in the press as former UK chief scientist David King and researchers from Oxford University released a paper claiming that the world’s oil reserves had been “exaggerated by up to a third,” principally by OPEC.

Their “objective analysis” showed that conventional oil reserves stand at just 850-900 billion barrels, not the 1,150-1,350 billion barrels that are officially claimed by oil producers and accepted by the politically influenced IEA.

They anticipated that demand could outstrip supply by 2014-2015.

In a statement that sounded like a direct echo of what peak oil analysts like me have been saying for years, co-author Dr. Oliver Inderwildi remarked, “The belief that alternative fuels such as biofuels could mitigate oil supply shortages and eventually replace fossil fuels is a pie in the sky. Instead of relying on those silver bullet solutions, we have to make better use of the remaining resources by improving efficiency.”

Again, it was hardly a revelation. I detailed the “political reserves” additions of OPEC producers in 2007, when I was writing Profit from the Peak. But the fact that it was recognized widely in the press was a marked change from the past.

ConocoPhillips Gives Up on Growth

On March 25, ConocoPhillips CEO Jim Mulva admitted that pursuing new oil reserves just doesn’t pay. The remaining resources have become too marginal and too expensive, and the competition for them has become too intense.

Rather than keep slugging it out with bigger and better-funded players in pursuit of growth, Conoco has decided to sell $10 billion worth of its assets over the next two years, all of them in the marginal category, and concentrate on producing its core assets.

The proceeds will be used to buy back its stock, reduce its debt, and raise dividends–just as rival ExxonMobil has been doing for the last five years or so.

When I inferred in Profit from the Peak that the oil majors were spending vastly more money on buying back stock than investing in new exploration because reserves were getting too expensive and risky, veterans of the Street greeted the idea with extreme skepticism.

Now it’s a plain fact. A Rice University study released in July 2008 found that the five largest international oil companies spent about 55% of their profits on stock buybacks and dividends in 2007, but only about 6% on new exploration and production. “Could we spend $20 billion or $25 billion [on exploration]? Absolutely,” Conoco spokesman Gary Russell said at the time. “Could we do it effectively, in a way that provides ultimate value to our shareholders? Probably not.”

Those of us who have been observing the trend for years greeted the latest Conoco comments with little more than a shrug, but it did get the attention of the laggard mainstream press.

In my next Energy and Capital column two weeks from now, we’ll see how the U.S. Department of Energy is now considering the possibility of a decline in world liquid fuels production by 2015, and pick up a few more clues from the International Energy Forum held this week.

Until next time,



Chris

Officials Wake Up to Peak Oil, Part 2

3 Categories for Exit Plan Research

Exit Plan Research

I. Health Care Rating

Now some of these countries listed below have to be on your exit plan list. Any country above 50 in Health Care rating is probably O.K. Note the U.S. is what, 37th in Health Care? WOW, why are you still here?
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

II. Canada best to escape potential climate change problems

Least Vulnerable: Canada, Ireland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, New Zealand, France, Uruguay, Switzerland, USA, United Kingdom, Japan, Iceland, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Estonia, Australia.

Most Vulnerable: Comoros, Somalia, Burundi, Yemen, Niger, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Chad, Rwanda, Haiti, Pakistan, Sudan, Kenya, Uganda, Djibouti, Nepal, Burkina Faso, Mali, Mauritania.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3346266/Canada-best-to-escape-climate-change.html

III. War are Fascist takeover

12 Places To Go If The World Goes To Hell

Joe Weisenthal and John Carney | Oct. 30, 2009, 8:52 AM | 922,765 |

War, oil shortages, global warming, nuclear bombs, and economic collapse... All of it seems unlikely, but don't you want to be prepared?

If you have to jump on a plane (or a boat or a train or a hot air balloon) and head for safety, you want to know where in the world you should go.

We've selected places that we expect will remain fortresses of stability, safety, and prosperity no matter what the world throws at it.

#1: Chiang Mai: All you really need to know is that this idyllic city in the North of Thailand is where famous investor Marc Faber makes his home. Faber is one of the most gloomy people you'll meet in the investment world, constantly issuing warnings about where you should live if the war comes (rural farmland), and what will happpen to the dollar (it will be worth less than toilet paper).

What's more, while Southeast Asia has been a hotspot for war, heroin, massacres, and political turmoil for decades, Chiang Mai has remained a stronghold of peace and stability. That's a great sign that it can probably survive no matter what history throws at the rest of us.

#2: Tristan da Cunha: This Island chain in the South Atlantic is actually the world's most remote inhabited achipelago. The population is just 271, so we're sure they're looking for new people. It's known for excellent fishing -- the perfect kind of self-sustaining career if times were to get really bad.

#3: Guam: American patriots can take refuge in this far flung outpost of America. While the economy is currently an unsustainable mix of government aid and tourism, the island could easily revert back to the kind of sustainable practices that kept its population alive for 4000 years.

The heavy US military presence should keep the island secure, although sustaining it if the continental US were to fall might prove difficult.

#4: Denver has a few things going for it. In the event of an oil spike, it's got proximity to amazing shale reserves. Even though shale has yet to take really off, a spike will make it an economic necessity. And in the event of a war, it's the most defensible city in the US, due to its geography and mountains.

It's mile-high sea level also makes it an excellent place to go in the event of global warming and rising sea levels. In fact, global warming should help turn surrounding areas into an agricultural breadbasket.

#5: Bern, Switzerland has undoubtedly proven itself a safe haven during Europe's bloody past.

Yet to think that the nations' mountains alone have defended Switzerland is to miss the savvy diplomatic genius of the country's leadership.

Thus it's in the capital, Bern, where you'll have a higher probability than most people in the world to get through any crisis.

The city is believed to be named, conveniently, after the German plural for bear, "Bären". It even has a 500-year old tradition of maintaining live bear pits, and now a more humane 'bear park'. Come join the fun.

#6 Puncak Jaya: This mountainous region of Indonesia wouldn't seem like a very hospitable place to live. But then, remember, in a time like this you're not exactly looking for hospitable. You're looking for survivable. And it turns out that the largest gold mine in the world is in Puncak Jaya, which means there's going to be tons of work and trade if you play your cards correctly. It also houses the third largest copper mine in the world.

#7: Capetown: When you're in the land of Africa, Cape Town is as good as it gets. Gorgeous views and harbors, the city is the second most populous in South Africa with good reason. Even if everything went to hell in a handbasket, Cape Town would quietly continue along, as if nothing had ever happened.

The state of Cape Town's economy is nothing like that of its sister cities to the north, thanks in part to the location of South Africa. It also is relatively free of Western foreign influence, yet, maintains stability and tranquility through the years.

#8: Necker Island: This is the Island that Virgin mogul Richard Branson owns. If you call him up, we're sure he'll let you live there when everything collapses.

#9: Rio de Janerio: Seeing as this city is already so post-apocalyptic, there shouldn't be much to worry about if things really get bad. They already understand how to live at the edge of economic and social chaos.

#10: Kansas City: No matter what happens to the USA, Kansas City will probably be okay. It's not at either one of the coasts, so you don't have to worry much about security or a foreign invasion or rising sea levels. It is surrounded by plenty of farmland (suitable for raising grain and livestock), and it's also at the intersection of several rail lines, so that if we experience an oil spike of unimaginable proportions, you'll still have access to transportation -- in fact, the city should thrive as a hub of activity.

#11: Tierra del Fuego: Wind patterns make this far-southern city in South America a perfect place to avoid any nuclear fallout. Again, there's a benefit of extremity. Nobody will bother with you there.

12: Yukon: The Yukon is the westernmost of Canada's federal territories. It is sparsely populated and these days the economy is heavily dependent on government and tourism. But if things fall apart, the area is certainly capable of sustaining small, thriving communities. There is plenty of wildlife for hunting and trapping, which will be very important in the early years following a global castatrophe when farming is not really a viable option.

As civilization rebuilds itself, the areas rare metal mining will be a boon. Lots of rivers mean you'll be able to get around easily.
The weather is harsh, especially in winter. So bring a warm coat. And if you are on your own in the wilderness, you'll have to be especially careful of bears.

http://www.businessinsider.com/ten-places-to-go-if-world-goes-to-crap-2009-10#chiang-mai-1

http://www.businessinsider.com/ten-places-to-go-if-world-goes-to-crap-2009-10

ViAnna Jordan deliberately discounted by Journal Sentinel News

• MJS continues with Disinformation and Misinformation
• Blackout in Black District with ViAnna Jordan's campaign bank account
• Jordan has the most campaign dollars over all other candidates

Errata! The Journal Sentinel should have noted that the popular community activist, ViAnna Jordan, has $5,075 in her campaign account. And that ViAnna Jordan appears to be the front runner in the County Supervisor race according to private polling. Jordan's name recognition is the highest among all other candidates. And Jordan clean government, clean elections and clean up the streets campaign has gained traction for her candidacy. Is is clear that the MJS is campaigning for the old guy establishment candidate falsely listed at the number one bank account who would in all likelihood vote the vested interest of those who would continue to Stop Sick Leave Pay for Workers, Put Black Daycare Businesses Out of Business and Support the Tom Barrett Jim Crow Legislative Effort against Voter Rights by Disenfranchisement of Local Voters in the Hostile MPS Mayoral Takeover of Public Schools. Ms. Jordan's campaign has made personal contact with the voters and it is known that ViAnna Jordan is a stand up person who will look out for the interest of local people, the community and its children. Jordan know she not only has to beat the candidates, but also beat the voter and election fraud that is business as usual in this city. As usual, the Journal Sentinel appears to have deliberately got this one all wrong in its effort to confuse the public, the community and the voters. Let's stand up on election day and show the Journal Sentinel [MJS] that the community know what is really going on.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/92062244.html#comment41986134

MILWAUKEE INTER DISTRICT PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE AND ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY
An Achievement History of Chapter 220 Wisconsin

Copyright by Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone, 1985, 1998
All Rights Reserved

SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL by:

Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
E-mail:
Web site:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878

The University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee, (1985)
Under the Supervision of Dr. Harold M. Rose

ABSTRACT

Little progress has been made in eliminating race and social class related inequalities in education. Among blacks and the lower classes, race and class have historically operated as intervening variables between effort and success, desire and achievement, and ability and the practical manifestation of that ability. Social status, prestige, education, and occupational mobility have been difficult to attain and even more difficult to pass on to future generations.

The most immediate manifestation of inequality in educational opportunity is the low academic achievement of selected racial minorities, including blacks, and the lower classes. Obviously, the problem of low achievement cannot be resolved by the educational system alone. Individual student characteristics, school factors, and attributes of students' families have been found to be related to achievement.

The principal objective of this research is an examination of the role of parental status and behavior on the academic achievement of students attending a majority white upper middle class suburban school that participates in a program of voluntary interracial schooling. More specifically, this investigation concentrates on identifying the aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that influence achievement and analyzing the differential effects of these influences on black and white student performance. The socioeconomic characteristics examined were: mother's educational level, father's educational level, father's occupation, family income, and home ownership. The measures of family culture were: parents' educational aspirations for children, parents' self-esteem, parents' locus of control, parents' social participation, and parents' reading habits. The effects of student status and behavioral characteristics are also investigated.

The results show that socioeconomic status, family culture, and attributes of students predict achievement. Different aspects of SES and family culture influence the achievement of black and white students. Number of suspensions is a predictor of both black and white student performance. The policy implications of these findings for interracial schooling are also discussed.

--------------------------------------------------------------
INTER DISTRICT SCHOOL CHOICE AND ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY

SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT:
A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE
AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL
by
Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
E-mail:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables . . . .
Acknowledgements . . . .
CHAPTER I--Introduction
CHAPTER II--Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
CHAPTERS III--The Research Project: Its Setting,
Motivation ,
Political Basis, and Methodology . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER IV--Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTERS V--Findings and Interpretations . .

Chapter
Notes
Bibliography

. . .

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Little progress has been made in eliminating race and social class related inequalities in education. Children enter schools with varying amounts of skills and knowledge which are often influenced by racial group membership and class status. Ideally, these differences should decrease as students advance in the educational system. Evidence indicates, however, that disparities between blacks and whites, and the lower classes and upper classes, become greater as grade level increases.

Among blacks and the lower classes, race and class have historically operated as intervening variables between effort and success, desire and achievement, and ability and the practical manifestation of that ability. Social status, prestige, education, and occupational mobility have been difficult to attain and even more difficult to pass on to future generations.

The individual and societal costs of educational inequality are great. Opportunities for obtaining further education and employment are significantly reduced for victims of inequality of educational opportunity. The social ramifications are both manifestations and perpetuations of the economic, political and social domination of blacks and the lower classes. Maintenance of such a system of domination severely compromises the principle of democracy and often results in poverty, social unrest, political apathy, disregard for social responsibility, and negative social behavior.

2

The most immediate manifestation of inequality in educational opportunity is low academic achievement. While selected racial minorities, including blacks and Hispanics, and the lower classes are most likely to be low achievers, other groups are increasingly becoming affected by inadequate academic preparation and performance UNational Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). The problem is indeed of great magnitude.

Educational inequality resulting from social class differences in the home or the school is almost invariably associated with educational inequality resulting from the derogated social position of blacks in American society as manifested in terms of unequal access to employment opportunities and residential segregation [Swanson (1979) and Wilson (1979)]. Upper and middle class white students often attend the better suburban schools in which facilities tend to be more modern and the influence of fellow students is more positive and achievement oriented. The fact is that racial segregation in the schools tends to represent class segregation and both have been found to result in lowered achievement.

School system efforts to eliminate the underachievement of many lower class and black students often entail either the provision of supplemental educational support or the changing of students' educational environments in terms of interracial schooling and the creation of a more diverse social class mix in the schools. Desegregation efforts involving only city school districts have, for the most part, failed to eliminate segregation along race and class lines. The Milwaukee,

3

l

Wisconsin public school system, for example, implemented its desegregation plan in the 1976-1977 school year. From 1978-1979 to 1981-1982, however, black enrollment in city schools increased from 42.2% to 47.8~. In October of 1983, there were still 21 schools in which the enrollment was over 80% black.1 Voluntary city/suburban transfer programs like Chapter 220 also provide an opportunity for race and class integration; however, such programs generally involve so few students that the problem of low achievement for large numbers of students is
unresolved .

Obviously the problem of low academic performance cannot be resolved by the educational system alone. Individual student characteristics, school factors other than racial makeup and school social class and family characteristics, have also been found to be related to achievement.

Certainly individual student characteristics such as student selfesteem and interest in school are related to student performance [Coleman (1966), Rosenberg and Simmons n971]. The effects of school factors are not so clear. Some scholars contend that attributes of schools have little or no effect on achievement and have offered alternative expla nations for disparities in performance (Coleman, 1966). Even most scholars who disagree with Coleman on the extent to which schools influence achievement acknowledge that "the success of schools in obtaining their goals is not solely dependent upon the characteristics and practices of the schools themselves."2

Social scientists have long recognized the importance of the inn uence of characteristics of students' families on achievement.

4

Researchers have identified many of the socioeconomic and family culture characteristics that are related to the academic achievement of white students. The often-nade assumption that white and black student performance is affected by the same aspects of SES and family culture has often resulted in incomplete identification of the specific aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that are related to the achievement of black students. If, as argued by Shimkin (1974) and Sudarkasa (1981), cultural differences exist between blacks and whites that do not necessarily result from social class differences between the two groups, black and white student achievement may not be related to the same aspects of SES and family culture. Although the problem of low academic performance resulting from differences in SES and family culture is difficult to solve due to the enduring nature of family characteristics, identification of these characteristics and understanding of the nature of their impact on achievement is an integral part of the solution.

RESEARCH OBJECTlVE

The principal objective of this research is an examinations of the role of parental status and behavior on student achievement. More specifically, this investigation concentrates on identifying the aspects of socioeconomic status and family culture that in In uence academic achievement and analyzing the differential effects of these influences on black and White student performance. The effects of selected student status

10

wanted them to attend, (2) children interested in and usually possessing the ability for comprehension of the abstract and verbal schooling offered at the time, and (3) children who were probably going beyond the lower levels and whose families supported the ambition for further education (Burton, 1953). After 1852, schools had to attempt to provide an education for students who did not want to attend, those whose families did not value education, those with little interest in and ability for the type of education offered, children who were not going beyond the years of school required, and those whose families were more in favor of them working as opposed to attending schools Curricula was still formal, abstract, verbal, unrealistic, and in no way addressed the practical concerns of the lower classes.7

Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb (1944) and Sexton (1961) commented on the elite status of those who were initially educated. Prior to 1890, less than five percent of young people in the country attended high school and college. Mbst of them were of high economic status and were being educated in order to follow in the footsteps of their parents. A few were of lower social status but aspired to higher status through education. By 1930, ten times more students attended high school than in 1890. Warner, HaYighurst and Loeb attribute this increase to a change in the pattern of social mobility. During the nineteenth centUTy, economic and social mobility were generally the result of the acquisition of cheap land, steady work opportunities due to developing frontiers, and expanding opportunities in business and industry. The collapse of business expansion after 1930 and the fact that most of the....~

17

also reported that children with high self-regard tend to have parents with high self-regard.

Unlike childrens' self-esteem, their locus of control has been found to be unrelated to that of their parents MacDonald (1966), Jorgensen (1979)]. Jorgensen stated that "in contrast to the influence of maternal achievement expectations on the sense of personal control, the mothers' own control expectations had no relationship to either their children's sense of control or their ideologies about achievement.'' He further contended that a sense of internal control in children is fostered by parental socialization which ensures that they consistently receive valuable rewards (warmth, nurturance, approval and acceptance with little hostility, rejection, or withdrawal) and punishment that is consistent but not authoritarian.22 Dave and Phares (1969) also found that child rearing practices differed between internals and externals and that acquisition of the belief in children was related to child rearing practices.

THE SELF-
CONCEPT

After nearly a century of research on the self-concept, investigators are as far as ever from agreeing on what it is and what it includes QRosenberg, 1979~. A variety of terms such as self-values, self-regard, ego, self-image, self~attitudes, and self-esteem are often used interchangeably to describe the same basic principle.

Prior to 1890, the self was equated with metaphysical concepts

1

18

such as the "soul," the "spirit," or the "will." Discussions of the self were concerned with philosophical and religious non-physical interpretations of self. Not until the 17th century was a dualism between content and consciousness which dveloped into an acceptable distinction between self-concept and concept of self, established.23 Descartes is credited with having made the original contribution stem-ming from his philosophy of (cogito ergo sum), "I think, therefore I am." Locke and Hume explanded on the notion that man, as a thinking intelligent being, had the ability to consider the self as itself. In other words, one could not only evaluate other objects, but the self as well. Kant (1934) developed the dualism further and specified the distinction between self as subject and self as object.

William James provided the bulk of the basis for present self-concept theory. His assumption was that everything, including the self, was objective. James' contention was that the empirical self (the self to be perceived). was comprised of four components. They were: (1) the spiritual self, which is the source of interest, will, attention, and choice; a composite of all of one's religious, intellectual, and moral aspirations; (2) the material self, which consists of the material pos-sessions we see as part of us; (3) the social self, how others perceive use; and (4) the bodily self, which refers to physical attributes.24 James stated that "our feelings of self-worth and self-esteem derive partially from where we see ourselves standing in relation to others whose skills and abilities are similar to our own on particular self-

19

images.'2 Cooley and Mead elaborated on James' basic theories and agreed that the birthplace for self was in society and that the in-dividual's self-opinion is largely determined by what others think of him.

SELF-ESTEEM

Both self-esteem and locus of control are aspects of the self-concept. Rosenberg (1965) regards self-esteem as the direction of the self-attitude. Dbes the individual have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of himself? Does he consider himself worthy or unworthy? Self-esteem has two different connotations. One connotation is that the individual thinks he is good enough. The other is that the person thinks of himself as very good.26

lYhen we speak of high self-esteem, then we shall simply mean that the individual respects himself, considers himself worthy; he does not necessarily consider himself better than others, but he definitely does not consider himself worse; he does not consider himself the ultimate in perfection but, on the contrary, he recognizes his limitations and expects to grow and improve. Low self-esteem, on the other hand, Implies self-rejection, selfdissatisfaction, self-contempt. The individual lacks respect for the self he observes. The self-picture is disagreeable, and he wishes it were other~ise.Z7

Earlier research on race and self-esteem contended that the dis-advantaged and derogated social position of blacks in the Uhited States obviously resulted in a seriously damaged sense of self-esteem. Wylie (1979), however, reviewed twenty-eight different investigations that utilized well known instruments to measure the relationship between

20

race and self-esteem, including Rosenberg and Simmons' 1972 scale and concluded that the earlier assessments of low black self-esteem were inaccurate. While one may expect blacks to have lower self-esteem than whites, self-assessments based on societal evaluations of the individual are primarily influenced by the perceived and/or actual evaluations of significant others, or persons whose opinions of the individual matter the most. Most blacks socialize, live, attend school or some combination of the above, with other blacks. While black adults do not generally work in the environments that are majority black, evidence indicates that blacks have been able to develop defense mechanisms to protect their self-esteem when they are in extended con-tact with whites (Gordon, 1980).

While Rosenberg (1979) reported virtually no association between self-esteem and social class among pre-adolescents and only a modest relationship among adolescents, there is a moderate relationship be-tween self-esteem and social class among adults. He deduced that one reason social class affects the self-esteem of adults more so than that of children is that children are not yet exposed to the class-related occupational conditions that shape self-esteem.28 Rohn (1969) also supports the position that occupation influences adult self-esteem.

LOCUS OF CONTROL

Locus of control, also known as internal/external control, was first introduced as a factor in achievement in E. Jerry Phares' 1957

21

Ph.D. dissertation in which he examined the viability of the then ac-cepted theory that the strength of rewards and punishments were the most important factors in learning. In an experiment in which half of his subjects were informed that whether they accomplished a given task was dependent upon luck and the other half that the task required great skill and that some persons were very good at it. Subjects who thought that success depended upon their own skills reacted just as reinforcement learning theory would predict, Their expectations for success rose after successes and dropped after failures. Subjects who thought that success depended on luck, however, reacted very differently and in many cases expected success after having failed at a given task. It appeared that traditional laws of learning could not explain some types of human behavior.29

Rotter and Phares decided to test the proposition that as re-wards cease, a behavior becomes weaker and eventually stops, but be-havior that was learned with intermittent rewards takes longer to die out than behavior rewarded every time it occurred. They used the test of internal/external control developed by Phares in his dissertation. In 1962, Rotter developed a final internal/external control scale con-sisting of 29 forced choice items that was published in 1966.

When a reinforcement is perceived by the subject as fol-lowing some action of his own but not being entirely contingent upon his action, then in our culture, it is typically perceived as the result of luck, change, fate, as under the control of powerful others, or as unpredic-table because of the great complexity of forces surrounding him. When the event is interpreted in this way by an in-dividual, we have labeled this a belief in external control.

22

If the person perceives that the event is contingent upon his own behavior or his own relatively permanent characteristics we have termed this a belief in in-ternal control.3° Rotter's views were consistent with the traditional theories on learn-ing in that he agreed that the streng h and frequency of rewards were important in learning theory. He went a step further, however, in that he believed that whether or not the individual believed his be-havior produced the rewards or punishment was also an important factor in learning.

A number of studies have focused on social class and racial dif-ferences in locus of control. Gore and Rotter (1963) found no social class differences between students who were internally controlled (internals), and those who were externally controlled (externals), at a Southern black college. They noted, however, that the students were quite homogeneous in class status. Franklin (1963), on the other hand, observed significant social class differences in locus of con-trol for non-college age students. Battle and Rotter (1963) found that among black and white sixth and eighth graders, lower class blacks were considerably more external than middle class blacks and upper and lower class whites. Research also indicates that black adults tend to be more external then whites and that the upper classes are more internal than the lower classes IBanfield (1970), Gordon (1980~],

[4PLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
_

Whether interracial schooling is a viable intervention in the

23

cycle of educational inequality for blacks is an important and often debated public policy issue. We are aware of the many problems as-sociated with court-ordered interracial schooling, including public and often violent opposition, high suspension rates among minority students, and questionable evidence that achievement is increased. It seems that interracial schooling was not just a temporary phenomenon designed to appease certain elements of society. Some form of inter-racial schooling has been a reality for thirty years. A study of the factors that influence achievement in this specific environment is not only important because of the circumstances under which interracial schooling occurred, but has major implications for increasing pupil performance in general.

The self-concept influences a variety of other attitudes, values, and behavior patterns. In turn, the self-concept is affected by a range of forces. Are the determinants of self-esteem and locus of control the same for blacks and whites? Do these parental attitudes affect black and white students differently? Those addressing the issues of the self~concept, race, and achievement should find this research helpful.

Blacks are too often viewed as homogeneous in terms of attitudes, values and behavior as well as class status, although to a lesser degree than in the past. This research is also concerned with how black class stratification influences the educational progress of black children, an issue of no minor importance for black economic and social mobility.

24

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

Chapter II reviews the literature on the effects of school social class, interracial schooling, socioeconomic status,and family culture on academic achievement. The discussions of the impact of school social class and interracial schooling on achievement analyze the general find-ings of research into these relationships. Other relationships, in-cluding those hypothesized between socioeconomic status and aspects of family culture and race and achievement, are also addressed in the r w iew.

,CLASS A-ND AC4DEI`tIC ACHIEST

Scholars use several approaches in the measurement of school social class. Coleman and the various scholars who reanalyzed the Equality of Educational Opportunity (EE08) findings, used characteristics of student bodies, such as average daily attendance and percentage of students in college curriculum to measure school social class. Other scholars, in-cluding Herriott and St. John (1966), measured the social class of schools in terms of socioeconomic characteristics of students' families, like father's occupational status. A third approach focuses on school characteristics such as curriculum and attributes of the staff. Wilson (1969) looked at socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of student bodies. Determining school social class by social and economic characteristics of the neighborhoods in which schools are located is the least employed and viable method of classification. School desegregation and more is specifically specialty schools are no doubt partially responsible.

Rufus King, a college preparatory specialty high school located in the city of Milwaukee illustrates this point. King, which has re-ceived national recognition for academic excellence, is located in a predominantly black neighborhood. Some would classify the neighborhood in which King is located as lower class, while others, including Rose, consider the area middle class. No matter how the neighborhood is classi-fied, however, the school does not reflect the racial and socioeconomic make-up of the neighborhood.

Prior to the implementation of the school's specialty program in the 1977-78 school year, King was over 99% black. Murphy (1982) reported the racial mix of the school to be 51% white, 478 black, and 2' other minorities. Approximately 20t, 40% and 10' of students come from the lower, middle, and upper income groups, respectively. Parents are gen-erally more educated than the average adult and tend to be white collar workers. Mbst students reside in the areas immediately surrounding the school and on the East side, although a significant percentage of the students live on the near Southwest and Northwest areas of the city. Using student body characteristics, socioeconomic attributes of students' families, and school characteristics such as curriculum, King is at the very least a middle class school.

Using the first three approaches of measuring school social class, King would most likely be considered an upper middle class chool. Con-sidering the geographical location of the school in determining school SES would provide little information about the student body, students'

26

families, or school processes.

1

Nb matter how school social class is defined, scholars generally agree that it has a significant influence on the academic achievement of black and white students. Rose (1976) stated that black student achievement is related to school social class and that cognitive achieve-ment is a function of school social class composition even with other significant inputs held constant. The environment of the lower class school, according to Swanson (1979), is harmful to upwardly mobile stu-dents. He argued that school social class composition has an important influence on achievement due to the attitudes that schools foster. Upper class schools foster attitudes conducive to achievement, like future orientation. In majority black schools, he argued, the majority of the student population tends to be lower class. Middle class black children attending these schools are often exposed to peer influences, such as lack of achievement motivation, that are not conducive to high achieve-ment. Wilson (1969) agreed that racially segregated schools are almost inevitably lower class. As a result of residential segregation, he stated, whites tend to live in socioeconomically homogeneous neighbor-hoods. Blacks, on the other hand, generally live in neighborhoods that are not socioeconomically homogeneous.

In Wilson's study, school social class was determined by the compo-sition of students' neighborhoods. Neighborhood composition was deter-mined by the percentages of residents who were black and who were from families headed by unskilled laborers, domestics, unemployed, or welfare recipients.] Wilson concluded that the social class composition of the

27

primary school had the largest independent effect on sixth-grade reading level.2 He further found that among students attending schools with similar social class composition, neither school racial composition nor characterteristics of students' neighborhoods influenced achievement. This latter finding has important policy implications. It is often ar-gued that educational benefits can not be derived from altering the demo-graphic composition of schools as long as residential segregation con-tinues. Wilson's data suggested, however, that the effect of neighborhood segregation upon achievement is derived entirely from the resulting segregation of neighborhood schools on social class lines. Even in the absence of residential rearrangements, restructuring the composition of schools can be expected to affect achievement.3

Herriott and St. John (1966), like Wilson (1969), found school social class to have an effect on student achievement independent of the social class of the home.4 In their study, school SES referred to the socio-economic status of the aggregated clients of a school rather than of the areas in which schools were located. They argued that the SES of the school and the neighborhood in which it is located are not necessarily the same because people living near schools may not have children attend-ing them and pupils from outside schools' neighborhoods may attend.5 Schools were divided into four SES groups based upon the percentages of students from homes in which (1) the father was an unskilled or semi-skilled worker, (2) the father was a professional person, business execu-tive, or manager, (3) neither parent received an education beyond high school, (4) at least one parent was a college graduate, (5) the combined

28

family income was less than $5,000, and (6) the combined family income was over $10,000.6 Students in schools of high and low SES differed significantly in several respects. In schools in the lowest SES cate-gories, 20% of students had been held back one or more years, 36% were behind in math, and 43% were behind in reading. The corresponding per-centages in schools in the highest SES category were 4, 9, and 10 respec-tively.7 IQ was found to increase with school SES. It should be noted that academic achievement was measured in a somewhat subjective manner. Principals were asked to report the above percentages. Teachers and principals were asked to estimate the proportion of students who were "not interested in learning." Still, Herriott and St. John had sufficient information to enable them to conclude that school social class signifi-cantly affects achievement.

Coleman (1966) concluded that the effects of the school environment on student achievement, whatever its racial or ethnic composition, appear to reseat from the educational proficiency of that student body. In ad-dition to the achievement level of other students, the "realistic" aspi-rations of other students affect achievement.8 In other words, as the educational backgrounds and aspirations of other students increase, a student's academic achievement increases no matter what the individual student's background. These findings have important implications con-cerning school race as a factor in student achievement. While his results showed higher achievement for all racial and ethnic groups in schools with greater percentages of white students, they also indicated that the ap-parent beneficial effects of a student body with a high proportion of

29

white students do not result from school racial composition, but from the higher educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds generally possessed by white students.9 Since white students are more likely than black students to be middle class, it is reasonable to assume that schools with a higher percentage of white students would have student bodies with higher and more "realistic" educational aspirations and better educational backgrounds than black students. The percentage of families owning en-cyclopedias, (2) transfers in and out of school, (3) average daily atten-dance, (4) percent of students in college curriculum, and (5) average hours spent on homework, were used to determine school social class.

Jencks (1972) noted that it is probably wiser to define a "good" school in terms of student body characteristics than in terms of its budget. According to Jencks, once a good school starts taking in '~n-desirable" students (the definition of desirable sometimes pertaining to academic, social, and economic attributes), its standing automati-cally declines.l° He concluded that while an elementary schools' social composition had only a moderate effect on student's cognitive achievement, and school racial composition had only a small effect on black students' later occupational status, this evidence is far more convincing than that supporting the position that expenditures influence academic achieve-ment. The type of friends students are likely to make, the values they are exposed to, and satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the school, are all dependent upon the character of the student body.ll Jencks reanalyzed Coleman's EEOS data and also concluded that the achievement of lower class students, both black and white, was fairly strongly related to

30

the socioeconomic level of their classmates. This usually meant that a student's achievement was also related to the race of his classmates, since black classmates tended to be poor classmates, and vice versa. When the socioeconomic level of a lower class child's classmates was held constant, however, their race had no relationship to achievement.l2 This conclusion is consistent with Coleman's argument that school social class has an effect on academic achievement independent of the individual student's family background. Jencks reported that when race and the economic status of students within schools were controlled for, differen-ces in school policies and resources did Nat significantly affect verbal achievement. Black student achievement was found to be even less related to schools' policies and resources than white student achievement. This conclusion was inconsistent with Coleman's findings.

Cohen, Pettigrew, and Rile' (1972) in a reanalysis of the EROS data, supported the assertion that school social class influences academic per-formance, but contended that the percentage of black students in the school, controlling for the effects of (1) urbanism, (2) parents' edu-cation, (3) structural integrity of the home, (4) family size, (5) home index items, and (6) reading materials in the home, has an effect on academic achievement as great as or greater than that of the social class of the school. Using the same measures of school social class as Coleman, they also found that when school social class variables were considered, the variation in individual verbal ability accounted for by school per-cent black diminished to the vanishing point.l3 They further argued, however, that the unique proportion of variance explained is not the

31

only relevant statistic in regression analysis and that consideration of other aspects of the results might have led to another interpreta-tion. The authors suggested that had the EEOS interpretation been based on the following evidence as opposed to having been based on the unique contribution of the variance explained, Coleman would have con-cluded that the effects of school racial and social class composition were confounded. Cohen et al argued that comparing the unique contribu-tion of the variance explained by percent Negro before and after the addition of the five student environment measures estimated the effects of student environment measures on percent Negro. When the five school social class measures were introduced, the size of the Beta weight for percent Negro increased from -.147 to -.212. This increase was inter-preted as meaning that school social class mediates the effect of school percent Negro.l4 The contention is that a moderate proportion of the variance in school achievement explained by school social class is shared with school percent black, and that while school social class is impor-tant, Coleman overstated its effects as a determinant of achievement.

The United States Senate Select Committee on Equal Educational Op-portunity (1974) indicated that tangible school facilities are much more important in determining academic achievement than Coleman and others who have concluded that school factors, particularly tangible facilities, have little effect on student performance reported. The socioeconomic mix of students in classrooms was cited as one of the school characteristics that increases academic achievement.

Wilson (1959) offered convincing evidence that school social class

i _ .1

32

is positively correlated with academic achievement. Edwards and Wirt (1967), editors of one of the many volumes in which Wilson's article appears, stated that the importance of the Wilson article derives partly from the tightness of its research design, which render it conclusions largely irrefutable, and partly from the information it provides con-cerning peer and school influences on levels of aspiration.l5 In a study of male students in thirteen high schools in and surrounding the San Francisco-Oakland Bay area, Wilson attempted to determine the effects of the school climate on students' educational values and aspirations. School social class was determined by: (1) father's occupation, (2) father's education, (3) mother's education, (4) length of residence in California, (5) race, (6) religion, as well as (7) impressions of the school "atmosphere" obtained while observing students in the halls, classrooms, and on playgrounds.l6

Schools were classified into three groups with A representing the highest class schools and C representing those schools in the lowest strata. Wilson found that 80% of students in class A schools, 75% in class B schools, and only 38% in class C schools wanted to attend college. College aspirations among children of professionals were much higher than the aspirations of manual workers' children in each school group. Wilson attributes much of this difference to attributes of parents. College aspirations varied-by father's occupation within and between school strata. Ninety-three percent of the children of professionals in class A schools as compared to 2/3 of the children of professionals in class C schools had aspirations to attend college. In working class schools, only 1/3 of the sons of manual workers compared to 1/2 of manual workers' sons in

!

33

middle class schools wanted to attend college. Wilson also found that the dominant class character of the school and students' class origins were positively correlated with students' aspirations for college at-tendance.

INTERRACIAL SCHOOLING AND ACHIEVEMENT

What exactly is interracial schooling and what are its societal and educational implications? The meaning of interracial schooling was de-bated even before the courts ordered an end to de jure segregation. Sometimes it is the contention that a school district is desegregated when one race schools are eliminated. Scholars argue that school dis-tricts are segregated unless each school reflects the racial makeup of the area in which the district is located. If the area in which the district is located is 25% black, for example, each school should have a black enrollment of approximately 25%. Simply speaking, then, desegrega-tion is considered an end to racial segregation.

The issue, however, is not that simple. Winy proponents of inter-racial schooling view school integration as a step beyond desegregation in terms of the attainment of social equality for blacks. Integration often refers to processes within schools. Schools have been considered desegregated but not integrated. Black and white students may be segre-gated by classrooms within schools. Some researchers argue that if cul-tural understanding and exchange are not promoted, schools are not inte-grated.

Voluntary city/suburban transfer plans, the focus of this discussion.

34

are by no means considered either desegregation or integration. These programs involve too few students to realistically be viewed as such. They have, in many cases, however, greatly altered the school environ-ments of black students in terms of racial and social class mix. The school environments of white students are relatively unaffected by the small increases in black students.

The findings on the effects of city/suburban transfer programs and interracial schooling in general, on academic achievement are mixed. St. John (1975), Weinberg (1975), and Crain and Mahard (1978) provided ex-tensive reviews on research investigating the relationships between inter-racial schooling and academic achievement. Crain and Chard reviewed nine studies of voluntary plans and reported that only two studies showed posi-tive results. One of these was a study of Boston's Operation Exodus and the other was Zdep's (1971) study of the Newark/Verona city suburban transfer program. The St. John and Weinberg reviews looked at a total of twelve studies of voluntary programs and found positive results in nine. The eleven studies found to have positive results by Crain and Mahard (1978), Weinberg (1975), ant St. John (1975) included three of Project Concern in Connecticut, Clinton's (1969) study, one by Samuels (1971), and a study performed by Helter (1972). Studies of METCO and Project Concern in Rochester, New York, also showed achievement gains for black students. Crain and Mahard (1978) found that two studies of ME] W and one of the Project Concern in Rochester, New York, showed negative or no effects on achievement.

St. John Weinberg, and Crain and Mahard come to very different con-clusions about the effectiveness of voluntary city/suburban transfer

3S

programs in raising black student achievement. St. John (1975) con-cluded that they have neither a positive nor negative effect on black student achievement, while Weinberg (1975) found interracial schooling to have an over-all positive effect. Crain and Mahard concluded that "sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.''l7

Why have scholars come to such different conclusions? According to Bradley and Bradley (1977), since Weinberg and St. John drew conflict-ing conclusions, both advocates and opponents of desegregation have been able to present evidence in support of their positions. Pettigrew, Useem, Normand and Smith (1966) cited a number of reasons why research-ers, particularly Armor, found negative results. They stated that Armor selectively reviewed only studies showing negative results. Addition-ally, Armor did not discuss (1) mitigating circumstances, (23 the fact that services to transfer blacks were actually reduced at the time of desegregation in three of the districts he studied, (3) findings of positive results in several of the programs reviewed, and t4) the possi-bility that white student achievement may have increased. Dual suc-cesses are not reported. They further stated that gains should not have to be "significantly" greater for desegregation to be viewed as success-ful in terms of increasing achievement. Lack of adequate control [Schellenberg and Halterman (1976)], and small sample size have also been cited as reasons for discrepancies in results.

While the nature of the impact of interracial schowling on black student achievement remains in question, there is general agreement that white students experience no negative effects. Z6ep (1971) analyzed a

36

voluntary city/suburban transfer program that began in 1968 involving a large eastern city and one of its suburbs. Thirty black children from the city were transported to suburban schools for a one-year trial period. The design of the program provided for the evaluation of any educational and behavioral outcome for both city and suburban children. black students in grades one through five were selected from 170 volunteers through a lottery procedure initiated by city school of-ficials. The black control group was selected from children whose par-ents had given permission for them to participate in the program, but who were not selected. The black experimental and control groups were matched by age, sex, and grade levels. The vice principal of the city school stated that to her knowledge, the children in both groups were representative of other residents of the neighborhood in which the city school was located in terms of SES and that neither group contained children who had behavioral or emotional problems.l8

Suburban classes not containing inner city children were compared to the classes in which black students were enrolled. When the black children arrived at the suburban school, they were met by a black teacher who was to provide assistance in making the transition to suburban class-rooms, if necessary. The black teacher worked on a cooperative basis with suburban teachers and gave remedial help when needed. The suburban com-munity is located approximately five miles from the city, and in 1968, had a population of about 15,000. Most of the suburban residents were white and a large percentage were high school and college graduates. Over 803 of the graduates from the local high school attended 2 and 4-year

Thirty-eight

a group of

37

universities or colleges.

Crain and Mahard (1978) noted a strong quality of schooling effect in the program. The overwhelming majority of students in the city school district were black and of low SES origins. In the sending city school, makeshift classrooms had been added and classes were overcrowded. First grade students only attended classes for half a day. The student-teacher ratio for reading instruction in the city school was often as high as 33:1 compared to a student-teacher ratio of 11:1 in the suburban school.l9 The mathematics taught in the suburban school was more con-temporary than that taught in the city school. Efforts were reportedly made to encourage black students to become part of the suburban school social climate. About 40 suburban families contributed to these efforts. Each of the black students had lunch at one of his/her suburban class-mates' houses every day.

Zdep's analyses showed that the program had positive effects on black student achievement. Post-test results showed significant achievement differences in reading, mathematics, and listening skills between children who remained in the inner city school and those transferred to the sub-urban school at the first grade level. For second grade students, there were also differences in favor of the transfer students, but they were not statistically significant. No significant differences in achievement by sex were reported. Results also showed that there were no significant achievement differences found between suburban students in classes con-taining city children and those not containing city children.

Zdep concluded that a poor black child will benefit more from

38

attending school with middle class children, white or black,-than he would from attending school with poor children.He also concluded that a black child, being more sensitive to peer influences, will benefit in an in-tegrated class with middle class whites, while white children would suffer few if any negative effects.20 Carlson (1974) reported that pub-lic opposition in Verona, the suburb of Newark, New Jersey that was the focus of Zdep's study, caused the study to be terminated.

The lETCO program in Boston, Massachusetts and Project Concern in Hartford, Connecticut, have been the subjects of a number of investiga-tions. The most widely published study of METCO was conducted by Armor (1972).

f]TCO began in 1966. Armor's analysis covered the period from October 1968 to May 1970. During that time, TACO involved the transfer of approximately 1,500 black students in all grade levels from Boston schools to 28 suburban communities. The design of the study was longi-tudinal. All students participating in the program underwent achievement testing in October 1968 and May 1969. Junior and senior high school students were administered questionnaires in October 1968, Hey 1969, and }lay 1970, which measured academic performance, aspirations and self-concept, attitudes toward and relationships with white students, and attitudes toward the program. The control group consisted of siblings of transfer students matched by grade level and sex, thereby controlling for the effects of family background characteristics.

Armor's results showed a pattern of higher achievement gains for transfer students, but the differences were not statistically significant.


39

Generally, increases in reading achievement were greater for elementary, secondary, and high school transfer students than for control students. For fifth and sixth graders, however, this trend was reversed. The con-trol group outgained the transfer group, but again, the differences were not significant. It should be noted that the control group of fifth and sixth graders had higher initial achievement scores than the transfer students.

halberg (1971) confirmed ArmDr's findings of no significant achieve-ment effects associated with AMMO. Armor's and lYalberg's findings were disputed by Orfield (1973) and Useem (1971). Blseem argued that due to non-response, Armor's sandpile of siblings was too small and non-random to constitute an adequate control group. Weinberg (1977) stated, however, that evidence does not indicate that a more adequate control group would have made a difference in Annor's results. Armor himself, in light of subsequent findings showing greater achievement gains for the transfer group than the control group, qualified his position.21

While Armor did not observe any significant achievement gains for transfer students, tEIC0 students apparently derived long-term educa-tional benefits. Seniors from the 1970 graduating class in the l£TCO program and in the contrD1 group were contacted in the spring of 1972 as part of an effort to assess the effects of the program on future educa-tional opportunities. Eighty-four percent of the transfer graduates ha" enrolled in colleges compared to only 56 percent of the graduates in the control group. By the end of the second year of college, only 59 percent of the transfer group still attended college compared to 56 percent of

40

the control students. This obviously indicates a higher dropout rate for transfer students. Still, more of the transfer students had some college than did control students. The METOO program appears to have had a very significant effect on college attendance.22 Transfer students also enrolled in higher quality colleges. Fifty-six percent of METCO graduates attended regular four-hear colleges compared to 38 percent of non-transfer graduates. Forty-seven percent of graduates from the trans-fer g,~up were enrolled in universities offering graduate degrees compared to only 12 percent of graduates from the control group.

The Useem (1971) and Meltzer (1977) studies of METCO concentrated more on racial attitudes and interpersonal cognitive skills than on aca-demic achievement. Meltzer found that interpersonal cognitive skills were more developed the longer students attended interracial classrooms and that apparently black students, out of social necessity, learn earli-er than white students to get along with members of the opposite race, which would account for the findings that white students' interpersonal skills increased more than blacks. In the Useem study, one third of white sample students had at least one black close friend. In schools where the principal positively sanctioned METCO and attempted to promote racial harmony, upper and middle class white students tended to have more positive attitudes towards the program.23

Hartford's Project Concern began in 1966 when 266 Hartford school children were voluntarily transferred to 34 schools in five affluent sub-urbs of Hartford. Transfer students were randomly selected by classroom units from schools with non-white student populations of at least 85~.

41

The control group was selected in the same fashion as the transfer group and consisted of 305 students remaining in the city schools.24 Mahan and Flahan (1970) contended that their finding of positive results could not be attributed to differences in home and social class related student characteristics. In the transfer group, 50% of students were from one-parent homes; 76% hat four or more siblings; 76' of parents were born in the South or in the Islands; and more than 30% of families were totally dependent upon welfare payments for support.25

In the fall of 1966, spring 1967, fall 1967 and spring 1968, experi-mental and control students were administered reading, mathematics, and personality tests. In grades K through 3, the transfer group surpassed the control group in the following areas:

(1) Increased verbal facility, both in oral communication and in response to standardized tests.

(2) Development in perceptual, space, and motor skills increased.

(3) The ability to see (or, at least, express) verbal relationships and to categorize verbal concepts showed significant relative growth. In the following areas, Ilahan and M6han found no significant differences between experimental and control groups:

(1) Numerical skills were not accelerated.

(2) There was no decrease in anxiety level.

(3) There was no measured difference between the groups in their expression of understanding of social expectations or of judgement in-volving common sense.26

Flahan's (1968) article highlighted aspects of Project Concern not

42

discussed in the Flahan and Mahan (1970) study including educational sup-port aspects of the program. }'ahan stated that the research implications are greater for Project Concern than the White Plains, MITCH, and Rochester programs due to the strength of its research design, and careful imple-mentation of both program and evaluative aspects of the study. Nbn-transfer students were provided a support team consisting of a teacher and paraprofessional aides while the other group had no supplements to suburban school resources in order to determine whether suburban inter-racial schooling, supportive assistance, or both, were responsible for increases in achievement.

Growth rates in verbal and numerical achievement were reported for both DISCO and Project Concern students. There was also a significant increase in IQ for Project Concern students. Even when controls received intensive compensatory treatment, the growth pattern in achievement and mental ability of transfer students was clearly superior to that of con-trols. Secondly, there was no evidence to suggest that white student achieve-ment decreases when educationally disadvantaged black students are placed in the classroom. Finally, city/suburban transfer is probably more effective at primary rather than higher grade levels.27

llahan also commented on the social adjustment of black students attending suburban schools. Sixty-eight percent of transfer students par-ticipated in after school activities and suburban teachers reported that 70 percent of transfer students made superior social adjustment.28

Grain and Flahard (1978) considered Project Concern as virtually mandatory and did not regard the Ffahan and Mahan (1968) study as showing

lit -

43

positive results. St. John (1975), however, felt that the fact that con-trol and experimental groups were comparable and the design called for a comparison between students receiving and not receiving supplemental aid added credibility to the findings. She reported greater gains for trans-fer students receiving supplemental aid than transfer students not re-ceiving assistance and that there was no evidence that supplemental educa-tional assistance benefited black students remaining in the inner city.Z9

Weinberg C1977) reviewed five studies of Project Concern, and in four of the five studies, greater achievement gains were reported for transfer students. Three of the studies were done by one or both of the Mahans, so it is logical that similar results would be found. Wood (1969) studied academic achievement among minority students in Project Concern a year after th'~program started using a control sample matched on WISC-Verbal I.Q. scores. The following are Wood's findings for the experi-mental group: (1) Grades K-l--Achievement in arithmetic, vocabulary, and verbal I.Q. increased; (2) Grades 2-3--Total performance on I.Q. in-creased significantly; (3) Grades 4-5--Vocabulary scores increased significantly. While gains were not sweeping, the overall direction was clear. The academic achievement of white children in the receiving schools was unaffected.30 Weinberg found Levy's study of Project Con-cern in suburban Cheshire inconclusive due to conflicting results.

Both Goldberg (1965) and M6han (1968) reported that Rochester, New York's city/suburban transfer program produced positive results. The city/suburban plan is only one aspect of Rochester's desegregation program. In February 1964, after the New York State Commissioner of

44

Education directed all New York State school systems to submit desegre-gation plans, Rochester implemented its Open Enrollment Plan. Under the program, each of the city's elementary schools was required to have some black students. The Voluntary Extended Hbme Zone or Triad Plan was also implemented. Under this program, attendance zones were enlarged so that a zone encompassed three contiguous schools. Children who had attended schools in any of the original zones were not displaced; however, child-ren who lived anywhere in the enlarged zones could attend any of the three schools. Goldberg felt that this plan preserved the basic values of the neighborhood school policy while still reducing racial isolation. Services to inner city schools were increased. Extensive involvement in pre-school programs, development of vocational and occupational oppor-tunities, and increased compensatory programs were made available in addition to the Triad and Open Enrollment plans.31

In the summer of 1964, 25 inner-city children attended six different primary schools in a suburban district adjacent to Rochester. Students were selected for participation on the basis of pupil readiness, teach-er's opinions of whether pupils could benefit from the experience, and parents' willingness to have their children participate. Parents were interviewed by a team of professionals from the New York State Department of Education.

Before Goldberg was contacted by the president of the school board of West Irondequoit, about 6,000 students attended West Irondequoit schools, of which only six were non-white. The degree of racial isola-tion in the suburb no doubt was part of their rationale (according to

45

Goldberg), for participating in a city/suburban transfer program. Goldberg made it clear that West Irondequoit was more interested in the "extratribal experiences," that Lincoln (1969) argued would benefit white and black children, than in whether desegregation would result in increased achievement for black students. He reported that:

The West Irondequoit schools came to realize that in their culturally advantaged schools, they were depriving their children of a rich cultural experience and understanding the basic principles of democracy.32 In its April 1965 newsletter, the West Irondequoit School Board stated that: "The Board believes that the presence in a single school of children from varied racial, cultural, socioeconomic and religious back-grounds is an important element in the preparation of young people for active participation in the social and political affairs of our democracy.~33

Goldberg was concerned with the social and cultural benefits de-rived from interracial schooling. Addressing the issue of metropolitan planm ng, he stated that the key to suburban cooperation with an urban system is the suburb's evaluation of the commitment of the urban system and that had Rochester not made early attempts to desegregate and up-grade its schools, West Irondequoit would not have been interested in urban/suburban educational cooperation.34

In addition to the School Board's sanction of the program, support included informational meetings for suburban teachers, exchange meetings of city and suburban teachers, and transfer parent conferences to ex-plain the purposes of the plan and discuss its details. The suburban

-

46

community indicated general acceptance of the program and made efforts to increase social acceptance. Parents of transfer students attended PTA meetings regularly and often attended coffee hours with suburban parents.35 There was, however, some suburban opposition. In the second year, the program was expanded to 35 students. Two other suburbs joined the program, and in 1970, 581 Rochester students participated in the transfer program.

In a 1970 study that compared black students in Rochester schools offering compensatory education, students in city schools without com-pensatory education, and students in the city/suburban transfer program, the Division of Planning and Research, City School District, New York, concluded that there were no differences in achievement between blacks in schools with compensatory education and city/suburban transfer stu-dents and that academic achievement depended on the quality of enrich-ment programs provided by school systems. Students in schools not receiving compensatory assistance (a lower pupil-teacher ratio and teach-er's aides) performed lower than the other two groups.

Samuels (1972) investigated Project Pocus (compensatory), Project Concern gNew Haven's city/suburban transfer program), and non-compensa-tory programs in Connecticut in order to determine their effectiveness in increasing (1) word knowledge, (2) word analysis,(3) reading, (4) total reading, (5) mathematics, and (6) self-image.36 Fifty-one Project Focus, thirty-seven Project Concern and fifty students who received no compensatory education (comparative group) were randomly sleeted to participate in the study.

47

The Project Focus students attended schools in New Haven. Their classrooms were self-contained, but they were allowed to attend other classes when assistance in reading, math, and other areas was needed. An attempt was made to meet the academic, cultural, and social-psychological needs of Project Focus students by employing special teachers in those areas. From 1969 to 1971, almost one million dollars over the regular per pupil expenditures was devoted to this program.

Project Concern began in the 1969-70 school year. The first graders involved in the program attended regular suburban classes and were pro-vided academic and psychological support as needed. Additionally, a support team, consisting of a teacher and a teacher's aide who provided academic and psychological support, accompanied groups of twenty-five students to various suburban schools.

In the spring of 1969, all three groups were given the Monroe Read-ing Aptitude Test to determine if their reading levels were equivalent at the kindergarten level. Students were also matched by age and sex. Post-tests in academic achievement and self-image were administered to the three groups of students in May 1971. The Metropolitan Achievement Test-Primary 1 was utilized as the measure of academic achievement. Self-image was measured by "All About Me," a test often employed by New Haven. Project Concern students scored significantly higher than the other two groups in reading. Results also showed that transfers had a more positive self-image.

According to Samuels, the emphasis placed upon reading in the sub-urban primary grades, the extra attention placed upon traditional verbal

48

skills in suburban childrenst homes, the level of confidence that sub-urban teachers have in their students' ability, the greater number of college graduates among suburban parents, and the intervention of city supportive teams may very well have contributed to the reading success of transfer students and to their trend of having a more positive self-image.37 Originally, it was hypothesized that Project Concern students would perform better than the other two groups in mathematics, but the results did not show this to be the case. One possible explanation is the intense compensatory education provided Project Focus students. Another possible explanation is that the comparison group attended a "marginal school," not yet an "inner city" or disadvantaged school in terms of social and economic status and racial composition.38

Samuels' results, based on a two-year study, showed that New Haven's Project Concern had a positive effect on the achievement of inner-city students and was therefore an effective educational intervention.

Operation Exodus in Boston is another voluntary city/suburban pro-gram in which positive results on achievement were found. Volunteers for the program were recruited by a private black parent's organization. Crain and }chard (1978) stated that a program with an ideological com-munity organization behind it may have appealed to a very different set of parents than a plan run by public school authorities, but they do not say in what respect parents would differ. In all likelihood, Operation Exodus parents were middle-class and community-minded.

CHAPTER 220

Chapter 220 in Milwaukee has not received the national attention

49

that METRO, Hartford's Project Concern, and Rochester's Project Con-cern have in the literature on desegregation and academic achievement. Palay (1978) and Kritek (1977) studied the 220 program, but the focus of these studies was not academic achievement.

In January 1975, Wisconsin State Representative Dennis Conta pro-posed a plan to establish a metropolitan school district to the Wiscon-sin State Legislature. The plan entailed merging Whitefish Bay and Shorewood High Schools with Lincoln and Riverside High Schools to form one district, the East Shore School District. The merger was to take place in September 1977. Students wishing to remain in neighborhood schools could do so. Students could also transfer part-time to other schools and full-time transfers could be made with East Shore Board authorization. Conta felt that the distinctions between racial group membership, low socioeconomic status, and low achievement are often overlooked, and that integration could serve important functions not directly related to improving educational skills, and it can and should be used to maximize the learning capabilities of children. Interracial schooling should be guided by learning potential and achievement level rather than by racial characteristics.

The Conta plan met with suburban opposition. Shortly after the proposal was introduced, a number of North Shore community groups voiced their disapproval. The Shorewood School Board and the Whitefish Bay and Shorewood Village Boards agreed to share expenses to hire a lobbyist against the plan.40

Kritek reported that a number of suburban district were over-

-

50

whelmingly opposed to a city/suburban interracial schooling plan. Several districts held advisory referenda and in each case,voluntary city/suburban transfer was voted against. In one district, a school board approved a transfer plan after citizens had voted not to implement a plan. Citizens attempted to have school board members recalled. In another instance, a suburban City Council passed a resolution urging the school board to reconsider its plan to accept 30 }Milwaukee transfer students. Mounting public pressure resulted in a hearing at which an alderman and the mayor rejected the plan. Two days later, the Ebard reconsidered and rejected the plan. In Brown Deer, citizens were op-posed to the program 3 to 1.41 Arguments against transfer plans included the view that they would increase class size, disciplinary problems would be created, fuel would be wasted transporting students, and that minority students would be more comfortable in Milwaukee with their peers than in strange surroundings.42

Conta's original plan was never passed. Assembly Bill 1020A became Chapter 220 effective Hey 4, 1976. Chapter 220 provides financial incentives to school districts encouraging transfers between schools or school districts that promote cultural and racial integration. Although 220 also provides for suburban students to attend Milwaukee public schools, most 220 students are black and transfer to suburban schools.

Under Chapter 220,each Wisconsin school district was required to have a planning council selected by school boards and consisting of five members: the superintendent, three school board members, and one citi-zen-at-large. If a suburban planning council recommended participation,

it met with its Milwaukee counterpart to set guidelines for the de-velopment of a plan. The joint plan was submitted to the suburban school board and if approved, was then considered by the Milwaukee school board.

The Nicolet High School District was the first to approve a plan. Whitefish Bay was the second district, and Shorewood, the third. The other districts that participated during the 1976-1977 school year ap-proved plans by the end of July. Brown Deer proposed the most ambitious plan in terms of the number of transfer students to be accepted.

-MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE-

See Part 2, 3, and 4 or E-Mail:

INTER DISTRICT SCHOOL CHOICE AND ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY
An Achievement History of Chapter 220 Wisconsin

Copyright by Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone, 1998
All Rights Reserved

SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, FAMILY CULTURE, AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: A STUDY OF BLACK AND WHITE PUPIL PERFORMANCE AT AN INTERRACIAL SCHOOL by:

Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone
E-mail:
Web site:
Phone: 414-934-9804
FAX: 414-934-9878

-------------------------------------------
Page 51

TABLE 2.1
CHAPTER 220 MINORITY TRANSFERS, 1976-1977 3

District 220 Transfers Percent Enrollment
_
Brown Deer 96 3.3
Fox Point-Elayside 8 .8
Maple Dale-Indian Hills 8 1.0
Nicolet and Feeder Schools 27 1.2
Glendale-River Hills 32 2.3
Greendale 35 .8
Shorewood 64 2.8
Whitefish Bay 58 1.7
TOTALS/AVERAGES 328 1.8

52

TABLE 2.2
1977-1978 SUBURBAN MINORITY ENRoLLMENl44

Total Total Total Black Minority Black

Enroll- Trans- Minori- Enroll- % of % of

District meets fers ties ment Total Total

Brown Deer 2,921 116 315 275 10.7 9.40
Cudahy* 4,364 0 132 3 3.0 .07
Franklin* 2,648 0 32 3 1.2 .11
Greendale 4,123 77 176 75 4.3 1.82
Greenfield* 4,214 0 103 12 2.4 .28
Nicolet ~ Feeders 5,240 124 371 272 7.1 5.19
Oak Creek 4,739 33 187 47 3.9 .99
St. Francis* 1,629 0 36 0 2.2 .00
Shorewood 2,425 95 187 118 7.7 4.87
So. Milwaukee 4,112 10 94 11 2.3 .27
Wanwatosa 8,599 105 311 189 3.6 2.20
West Allis*-
West Milwaukee 10,795 0 146 11 1.4 .10
Whitefish Bay 3,184 68 122 77 3.8 2.42
Whitnall 2,549 17 37 1.5 .63
_ _ _ _ ~

SUBURBAN TOTALS 61,542 645 1,798 1,109

*-non-participating districts

Milwaukee students must apply to be accepted to Nicolet. Prior school records regarding disciplinary problems, grades, and attendance are reviewed. Acceptance to the program is not predicated on grades alone. Applicants are accepted based on an evaluation of whether they

3.7

,

53 have the necessary skills to perform the coursework and ability to adapt (if necessary) to the social and educational environment. In other words, can they "succeed" at Nicolet? There is no standard for-mat for these evaluations. The ''nulti-ethnic" counselor, Ms. Barbara Hamilton, who reviewed the applications, views parent involvement as one of the key elements in dete m ining whether students will succeed. She felt that parents of 220 students, many of whom she had met with, tended to have a high sense of self-esteem and self-direction. The applica-tion process itself is indicative of her assessment. Parents must call the individual school to first find out how to apply. In some cases, prior scholastic performance may be indicative of a student's ability to successfully complete high school at Nicolet. In other instances, a student's own desire to succeed, even though his/her prior grades may have been average, is the basis for acceptance.

Nicolet only accepts 220 students as freshmen. Siblings of Nicolet students and graduates are given first priority. The school's intentions are to accept thirty new students each year.

SOCIAL CLASS AND ACAD~EC ACME

'"Family background,' t '"social class,'' and "economic status" are often used interchangeably by social scientists. This interpretation of these complex concepts often poses serious problems in terms of the comparability and interpretation of research findings. The term "social class" has been defined in a variety of ways. Disputes about

54

the legitimacy of this term have been many and heated.45 Some scholars deny the existence of social classes in America. Jencks (1972) stated that:

The te m family background can itself be somewhat mis-leading, since differences between families derive not just from differences between neighborhoods, regions, schools, and all other experiences that are the same for children in the same family.46 Socioeconomic status also has various interpretations. Definitions of SES will be discussed in greater detail shortly.

By "social class" Sexton meant the position which families occupy in society and the very strong tendency for children to be molded into the same position by influences in the home, the community, and the school.47 The Marxian view of social class, on the other hand, is predicated upon the objective classification of an aggregate of people with reference to their similar reactions to the means of production and the concept of struggle which ultimately embodies the ideology of class consciousness.48

By "family background," Jencks (1972) referred to all the environ-mental factors that make brothers and sisters more alike than random individuals. "Some of these factors are economic, while some are not."49 He further stated that there can be great variation in "family background" among children who come from the same social or economic class.

Like definitions of SES, family background, and social class, conceptualizations of academic achievement vary widely. White (1982) stated that academic achievement refers to a broad range of social

55

process variables including class rank, grades, IQ scores, and standard-ized test scores. Many studies of student performance also examine the amount of education received at the post-secondary and college levels. Curriculum placement and academic awards have also been con-sidered indicators of student achievement.

Four approaches to the study of the relationship between students' home environments and their academic performance were identified by Iverson and Walberg (1982). The first is the sociological survey, which focuses on the effects of socioeconomic status variables. Warner, Meeker, and Eell's (1949) Index of Status Characteristics and Hollinghead's Two Factor Index of Social Position are two of the most well-known measures of SES, but are by no means the ones most frequently used. O.D. Duncan's Socioeconomic Index and the North/ Hatt ONORC) Index are the most widely employed measures of SES and are generally considered to be superior to other measures for most survey and large-sample situations. The U.S. Census Socioeconomic Status Scores and Alba M. Edwards' Social-Economic Grouping of Occupations are two other well-known social status scales. Single indica-tors of SES like family income, education, and occupation, are some-times used. Of the single indicators, occupation, because of its high correlation with both education and income and the fact that occupa-tional prestige ratings are highly stable, is considered the best single predictor of socioeconomic status. Frequently, the effects of status-related characteristics such as family size are examined in sociological surveys.

56

The effects of birth order, spacing of children, and related family structural characteristics are investigated in Constellation studies. Family SES and Constellation studies are less expensive proxies for aspirations, conditions, and processes in the home which are conducive to learning and less valid for predictive validity and psychological theory than the other two approaches.50

Dissertations by Dave (1963) and Golf (1564) provided the basis for the analysis of the parental and parent-child interactive behaviors that are the focus of the Chicago School. Bloom's assumption that the total environment surrounding an individual is composed of a complex network of forces and that a subset of this total network of forces is related to each human characteristic , was the basis for selection of the process variables chosen for investigation by Dave and Wolf. Wolf used thirteen process characteristics to identify 'dress for achievement motivation" "press for language," and "provisions for general learning." The three process variables accounted for 49% of the total variation in intelligence.51

Dave used twenty-one process characteristics to define six press variables believed to determine "the educational environment of the family."52 The six press variables were: achievement press, language models, intellectuality in the home, academic guidance, activeness in the family, and work habits in the family. Dave found different press variables to be related to various aspects of achievement. Family edu-cational environment was found to be related to over 50% of the variation in scores for problem solving in reading, arithmetic, and word

57

knowledge, but only accounted for 31% of the variance in arithmetic computation scores. Earlier Chicago school research focused on all of these presses. Later studies, however, concentratedon the presses for academic guidance, achievement (both for the parent and child), and activeness of the family because these aspects of the home environment are most easily influenced by intervention programs. Language and intellectuality are less subject to change, involve parental status more than behavior, and appear to be less associated with academic achieve-ment.53 The works of Kelvin Majoribanks (1963 and 1972), and Herbert Walberg (1976) characterize Chicago school research.

Studies within the British school are differentiated from those within the Chicago school in that they concentrate on parental ex-periences, attitudes, and material conditions in the home rather than on behavioral processes and are often concerned with parental attitudes towards and experiences with school practices. The home assessment measures used,such as the Survey of Parents of Primary School Children, typically include questions such as, ''bat do you feel about the ways teachers control the children at (present school)?" and '~as the head teacher, or any other teacher, talked to you about the methods they use at (present school)?"54 Typical questions asked in the Index of Edu-cational Environment, a commonly used instrument employed by Chicago school researchers are, 'fib you read to the child?" and '~ho makes the plans (for family vacations)?"55 Studies by Claeys and DeBoerk (1976), Schaefer (1977), and Frazier (1959 ) who used reading habits of parents as a home environment measure, are classified as British school

58

stories.

Most of the literature discussed in this review can be broadly classified as sociological surveys and Chicago and British school re-search. Distinctions between types of studies, however, should not be taken too far. Many investigations of the relationship between characteristics of students' families and academic achievement examine both the effects of SES and family background on student performance as well as relationships between socioeconomic status and character-istics of the home environment.

The works of Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb (1944), Hollingshead (1949), Sexton (1961) and Bossard and Boll (1966) provide insight into how social class influences student achievement. Hollingshead's ana-lysis indicated that the effects of SES are mediated through a number of factors and processes including aspects of family background, the attitudes and expectations of teachers and administrators, and direct parental influence in school practices. He believed the motivation of adolescents towards high school and education in general to be directly related to the grades they received and that educational motivation was derived from students' experiences in their classes and family environment:

The class I and II boys and girls know that high grades are necessary if they are to achieve the educational goals set for them by their family and class. Parents, friends of parents, brothers, sisters, and relatives who have been outstanding students in Elmtown High have set precedents they are urged to follow; for most, high school is merely a preparatory step for college. Then too, parents and relatives who have achieved prominent positions in the community, expect them to be leaders. Stimulated by this interest and these

59

examples, thief generally responded by aiming for greater achievement.

The assumption that the majority of upper class students achieve at higher levels than lower class pupils because they are more motivated is not totally accurate. While class related aspects of the home en-vironment including intellectuality of the home have been found to influence achievement motivation, "lower class culture" cannot, by any means, be held totally responsible for low achievement. Warner, Havig-hurst and Loeb argued that students from the lower classes did not have all of the educational opportunities they or their parents desired. They cited the frequency with which "lack of money" was given as a reason for quitting school, the sharp increase in high school and college en-rollment that resulted from the stablishment of the National Youth Ad-ministration student-aid program in 1935, and the fact that parents incurred a substantial out-of-pocket cost even when their children at-tended "free" schools as evidence in support of their position S7 Low economic status affects student achievement not only because pupils in this strata do not have access to better schools as discussed in Chapter I, but because the fact that many students, historically and presently, have worked in order to assist their families financially. Hollingshead stated that many parents in the lower classes actually encouraged their children to quit school and work.

A by no means negligible element is a teacher's expectation that the class I and II child will "make good"; and she helps him realize this goal, for, after all, his parents may "help" a teacher or cause "trouble" very easily. These factors react in subtle ways to produce

60

high grades and leadership in extracurricular activities in classes I and II.58

Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb (1944) and Bossard and Boll (19663 also provided evidence that teacher expectations are influenced by students' social class backgrounds. In Old City, the setting of the Warner, Havighurst and Loeb study, teachers placed students into cur-riculum sections based supposedly on their assessments of students' abilities. When asked whether there was "much class feeling in the school," a junior high school teacher said:

Oh, yes, there is a lot of that. We try not to have it as much as we can, but of course we can't help it. Nbw, for instance, even in the sections we have, it is evident. Sec-tions are supposed to be made up just on the basis of records in school but it isn't and everybody knows it isn't. I know right in my own section A I have children who ought to be in B section, but they are little socialites and so they stay in A. I don't say there are children in B who should be in A, but in the A section there are some who shouldn't be there. We hang discussed it in faculty meetings but nothing is ever done. The principal expressed a belief that children from the "best" families usually did the best work because their families are capable and edu-cated and they enter schools with knowledge that students from other social classes do not have. Based on statements by principals and teachers and the distribution of students in sections by social class, Warner, Havighurst, and Loeb concluded that the ranking of students in classrooms was clearly influenced by status considerations.

Rejecting the use of a single factor index, Hbllingshead's analysis was based on community rater's classifications of families according to five general criteria. These criteria were (1) the way a family lived, which included place of residence, type of dwelling, and furnishin (2) income and material possessions; (3) whether parents participa in community affairs, politics, religious activities--were "civic," "radical," "conservative," "a good community man," didn't give a d.. about education"; (4) family background, including ancestry, kin and national origin; and (5) reputation or prestige.60

Families were divided into five classes. Class I families ha' highest incomes in the community, which were reported to be at lea' $5,000 annually, with some in the S25,000 to $35,000 per year brac} Their wealth had for the most part been attained through investment land, securities, and ownership of businesses. The status and weal of Class I members was usually inherited, not achieved through thei efforts. The inheritance of abilities and characteristics was stro emphasized and acquired traits were believed to represent the outwa pression of "hereditary qualities.''61 Formal education was not high yarded as a tool for a professional career or for the acquisition o: knowledge in the traditional sense. This attitude toward education was no doubt due to the relative unimportance of a college educatior the acquisition of wealth and social mobility in this group. Fewer one-half of Class I members over 60 years of age had attended colle' universities. Nearly all of the middle aged persons graduated from school, but relatively few graduated from college. The younger peop completed high school, but only about one-third of the women and one half of the men completed college.62 All Class I families were home owners and lived in the most exclusive residential areas. Class I

62

individuals were not as active in community affairs or politics as Class II members but they exercised behind the scenes control of the political structure. Almost all Class I families belonged to the country club and most of the women also belonged to the exclusive "Friday Morn-ing Club." Leisure activities took up the majority of this exclusive two percent of the community's time.

Nearly one-half of Class II families attained their positions through their own efforts. The remaining families inherited their posi-tions, but did not have sufficient "breeding" to be accepted into Class I. Annual family incomes ranged between $3,000 and $10,000 in 1941. Income was earned by male heads of families who either owned their own businesses, were salaried executives for enterprises owned by Class I families, were salaried professionals in a public office, or were inde-pendent professionals, such as attorneys, medical doctors, and dentists. According to Hbllingshead, Class II men concentrated on "the aggressive manipulation of economic and political processes." Prestige in Class II was as much dependent upon civic leadership as economic success. Members of Class II were very active in community affairs and participated in organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce, Masonic dodge, and the Women's Christian Temperance Union. Seventy-seven percent of the leader-ship positions in civic organizations were held by members of Class II. Six percent, twelve percent, and five percent of these positions were held by individuals in Classes I, III, and IV respectively. Class II members viewed education as the principal vehicle for obtaining success and emphasized the need for their children to pursue a college education.

63

The adults in this group were the most highly educated in Elmtown. Four out of five parents completed high school and one-half of them at-tended college. One-half of Class II families lived in the "best" residential areas and 90% were home owners.

In Class III, annual family incomes ranged from S2,000 to $4,000. Forty-two percent of these families owned farms,small businesses, or were independent professionals. The remaining 58% derived their in-comes from employment in local mills, mines, banks, offices, and public service. One-sixth of the mothers were employed outside of the home. Two-thirds of Class III families owned their own homes and 25% lived in the best residential areas. Only one male in Class III graduated from college and only 23% completed high school. The women in this class were considerably more educated than the men. Sixty-three percent completed high school and 10% held college degrees.

While Class III parents' aspirations for their children's future education were not as high as those of Class I and II parents, evidence suggested that they at least wanted them to complete high school and that a significant percentage of Class III parents wanted their children to attend college. Twenty-seven percent of Class III high school stu-dents were enrolled in college preparatory courses.

Class III families were socially and politically active. Hollings-head reported that membership and active participation in many organiza-tions conferred prestige within this class. Women and men belonged to social clubs, church groups, patriotic societies, and civic betterment groups among other organizations. The majority of Class III individuals

64

belonged to clubs and organizations dominated by members of that class. A few, however, belonged to the more prestigious Country and Rotary Clubs. Class III members were more active in politics than the other classes, but members of Classes I and II were the policy makers.

Annual family income for Class IV families ranged from S800 to $2,700 and was earned for the most part from employment in the mines, mills, and shops. Thirty percent of the mothers worked outside of the home. The higher classes characterized Class IV individuals as poor but honest hard workers who pay their taxes, raise their children pro-perly, but never seem to get ahead financially. Only 35' of Class PV families owned their own land.

Class IV members were active in fraternal organizations such as the Eagles Club and their auxiliaries. For the most part, however, civic and community organizations were outside of their experience. Their lack of participation in community activites was the result of a number of factors including lack of leisure time, the fact that Class IV women's "place" was in the home or on the job, and insufficient financial resources to participate in costly activities.

Only about 51 of fathers and slightly less than 10% of mothers in this class graduated from high school. Mbst of the children in Class IV had aspirations to complete high school, but parents did not en-courage this and often actually took their children out of school in order for them to work. The average Class IV student only completed two years of high school.

Ninety-two percent of employed Class V fathers were either unskilled

65

or semi-skilled laborers or machine operators. Fiftyifive percent of the mothers worked outside of the home as waitresses, dish-washers, washerwomen, cleaning women, cooks, janitresses, and unskilled domestic workers. Between 1937 and 1941, 53% of these families received supple-mental relief. Annual family income ranged from $500 to $1,500. Only 19% of these families owned their own homes. The majority lived in di-lapidated dwellings. Fifty-six percent of the children in Class V families were from broken homes.

Sixty-seven percent of Class V parents left school before comple-tion of eighth grade. The children, for the most part, only attended elementary school. Members of Class V were almost totally uninvolved in organized community activities.

Several indicators, including grades and failures, were used to measure academic achievement. As the following table shows, students from the higher classes received the best grades. TABLE 2.3

PERCENT WITH MEAN GRADE oF:63

CLASS 85-100 70-84 50-69

I and II S1.4 48.6 00.0
III 35.5 63.2 1.3
TV 18.4 69.2 12.4
V - 8.3 66.7 25.0
TOTAL 23.8 66.3 9.9

66

Class related differences in student performance were also evident in the student failure rate. When the grade records of 495 adolescents who had completed at least one semester of high school were analyzed, it was found that Class II had only one failure. Five and one-half percent, 27% and 89% of the Class III, IV, and V students respectively, failed one or more courses. Academic awards and honors tended to go to students from the higher classes even when pupils from the lower classes outperformed those from the upper classes. IQ was found to be significantly related to class position; however, the degree of associ-ation was not high enough to attribute the high grades of Class I and II students to their intellectual capacity as measured by IQ. This finding led Hbllingshead to conclude that the higher achievement of upper class students did not simply result from differences in innate intelligence.

Coleman (1966), like Hollingshead, included both socioeconomic
status and family background variables in his analysis of the relation-
ship between family characteristics and student achievement. The family
background characteristics used were clustered into eight variables
which were:
(1) Urbanism of background, which was based on the community in which
the student and mother grew up; and migration, which was based on the
student's and mother's place of birth.
(2) Mbther's and father's education.
(3) Structural integrity of the home; which referred to whether both
parents were present in the home.

67

(4) Smallness of family (family size).
(5) Items in the home; which included televisions, telephones, record
players, refrigerators, automobiles, and vac w m cleaners.
(6) Reading material in the home; which referred to dictionaries, en-
cyclopedias, daily newspapers, magazines, and books.
(7) Parents' interest; which was based on whether parents talked with
their children about school and whether anyone read to the children
when they were small.
(8) Parents' educational desires; which included students' perceptions
of how good a student their parents wanted them to be, how far in school
parents wanted them to go, and parents' attendance at PTA meetings.
Overall, background characteristics accounted for between 10 and 25
percent of the variance in individual achievement.

TABLE 2.4
PERCENT OF VARIANCE IN VERBAL ACHIEVEMENT ACXXl~DrED FOR AT GRADES 12,
9 AND 6 BY SIX AND EIGHT BACKGROUND FACTORS FOR BLACKS AND WHITkS.64

GRADE 12 GRADE 9 GRADE 6
Eight- ~ Eight- Eight-
Six Eight Six Six Eight Six Six Eight Six

Blacks 13.48 15.14 1.66 12.15 14.44 2.84 14.01 14.62 .61

Whites 14.71 23.03 8.32 17.81 23.28 5.47 16.20 17.64 1.44

The first column for each of the three grades shows the variance ac-counted for by the first six objective background characteristics. The second col D gives the variation accounted for by all eight background

i

68

factors. The third column gives the added variation explained by parents' interest and aspiration for their children.

As Table 2.4 shows, the six measures of objective conditions as-count for more variation in achievement in earlier grades than later ones. Coleman attributed this phenomenon to the fact that the family's impact on the child has its greatest effect in earlier years and con-cluded that family to family differences in achievement should decline after the beginning of school. He rejected the argument that the family's impact on the child affects his receptivity to later experiences, thus family to family differences in achievement would increase as the child progresses in school. As previously stated, however, there is evidence to indicate that achievement gaps widen with increase in grade level. This does not necessarily mean that Coleman's conclusion was incorrect. Factors other than family background characteristics may account for this increase in achievement differences.

Secondly, the relationship between subjective home conditions and achievement shows an opposite trend over grades. Their relation to achievement increases with grade level.65 The indication is that either older children perceive their parents' interest more accurately than younger ones, or parents' interest has more impact on achievement in later years. Thirdly, Coleman found a difference in the effects of sub-jective home conditions for different groups. Parents' interest accounted for much more variation in achievement for whites and Asian Americans than it did for any other groups. Upon investigation of the reasons for these differential effects, Coleman considered the possibilities that

69

either (a) Negro, Mexican American, Puerto Rican, and American Indian children fail to perceive their parents' interest or lack of interest in their schooling as fully as do whites and Oriental Americans; or (b) the parents of these minority group children are less able to translate their interest into effective support for the child's learning than either Oriental American or whites parents, were considered. The evi-dence supported both of these positions.

Coleman concluded that: (1) in the sixth grade, economic level has the highest relation to achievement for all minority groups, while parents' education has the highest relation for whites; (2) in later years, parents' education has the highest relation to achievement for nearly all groups; (3) for blacks at grade 12, the length of time in an urban environment and family size (in terms of smallness) have ap-proximately the same effect on achievement as parents' education; and (4) the structural integrity of the home (the father's presence or absence) shows very little relation to achievement for blacks. The relative importance of background variables was found to differ for each group. The importance of educationally related attributes of the home (parents' education, reading matter), is greater for white children than for minority children. Armor stated that:

A family's life style--their stress on education, their eco-nomic well-being, their child-rearing practices and other similar factors--is likely to have an important effect upon the ctild's interest in and ability to carry out academic work. OD

Armor (1972) called this complexity of factors family life-style. As a result of the controversial nature of two of Coleman's conclusions,

70

a new analysis of the complete elementary school data from the Coleman report was performed. The first conclusion that A`,.~r examined was that the facilities in schools attended by blacks and whites were basic-ally equal. This finding contradicted the generally accepted belief that one of the major causes of low black student achievement was that blacks attended inferior schools. The second conclusion, which is the one that is more pertinent to this research, was that compared to the effects of family background, the effects of school staff and facilities on achievement are of minimal importance. In other words, improving the quality of schools attended by blacks alone will not reduce the gap between black and white achievement.67

Armor used five major indices to measure family life-style. The first four indices, which were (1) percent of students with fathers in shite collar occupations, (2) average education of both parents, (3) per-cent of students living with both natural (or legal) parents, and (4) the average number of household items, were characteristics of students' fami-lies. Both mothers' and fathers' education were divided into three cate-gories: less than high school, high school including post-high school business or technical training, and some college or college graduation.68 The household items were television sets, telephone, record player or hi-fi, dictionary, refrigerator, encyclopedias, vacuum cleaner, automobile, and daily newspaper. The fifth index, which Armor considered a com-munity index, was percent of blacks in a school. A black school was defined as one in which more than 50 percent of the pupils were black. School percent black was included because Armor felt that black families

may have different attitudes toward education than white families with similar socioeconomic characteristics resulting from the previous caste position of blacks within the structure of status attainment. Family attitudes toward education were not directly measured. Indices were formed for each student from questionnaire data and averaged over all of the students in a given grade. Indices thus represented aggregate family characteristics for the school community. Schools then, not individuals, were the units of analysis. Six grade verbal achievement test scores were employed as the measure of academic achievement.

Armor used the term "community inputs" to describe the aggregated characteristics of students' families. It is important to note that "community input" measures combine both family and neighborhood effects. These inputs may only reflect the composition of schools' immediate neighborhoods. Moreover, school level analysis does not allow for differentiation of the effects of individual family characteristics on their own children from those of families in general on children who are not their own.69

Family Structure
White Collar
Household Items
Parents' Education
Percent Black

TABLE 2.5
CORRELATIONS OF 6TH-GRADE VERBAL ACHIEVEMENT WITH CCMbi£NITY INPUT FACToRS70
Black Achievement in Black Schools White Achievement in White Schools

.14 Family Structure .31
.16 White Collar .51
.60 Household Items .67
.52 Parents' Education .66
.04 Percent Black -.22

72

As Table 2.5 shows, the effects of the five background character-istics are different for blacks and whites. The most obvious differ-ence is that socioeconomic status characteristics have a much greater impact on white student achieve,,~llt than black student achievement. The weak correlation between family structure and achievement contra-dicts Mbynihan's conclusion that family structure is a strong predictor of black or white achievement. Armor's reanalysis supports the find-ings of Coleman that were reexamined.

Kenneth Wilson (1979) investigated the effects of integration and class on black educational attainment. Wilson used data fro n Bachman's tl970) Youth in Transition Project which investigated the effects of social environments on factors such as high school graduation, college completion, employment, and educational attainment. Bachman's study analyzed data from a national sample of 2213 male high school students in 87 public schools,of which 256 were black. Wilson used both an average of black students' grade point averages in the ninth and tenth grades and pacing to measure academic performance. Pacing was added because academic performance had been found to be a poor predictor of black educational attainment by scholars including Porter (1974) and Porter and Wilson (1976). Pacing refers to the frequency of students either being held back a grade, staying in the usual age cohort, or being advanced to a grade cohort one year ahead of his or her initial cohort.71

An index of six equally weighted items was constructed to determine socioeconomic level. The items were: (1) fathers' occupational status,

73

(2) fathers' education, (3) mothers-' education, (4) possessions in the home, (5) number of books in the home, and (6) number of rooms per person in the home. Home possessions were similar to those looked at in Coleman's research.

Wilson was unable to draw any firm conclusions concerning the re-lationship between social class and academic achievement; however, he did observe that youths from upper class backgrounds followed attainment sequences that differed significantly from those of blacks from lower class backgrounds.

SOCIOECONKh0C STATUS AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

Numerous studies show a strong relationship between socioeconomic status and academic achievement. Kelin (1971) reported that the esti-mated correlation between SES and science achievement for elementary school pupils was .802. A correlation of .755 between SES and Stanford Achievement test scores among suburban elementary school students was reported by Dunnell (1971). Stephenson and Mares tl973) found a cor-relation of .865 between SES and standardized achievement test scores in big city schools. St. John (1971) stated that the relationship between SES and almost any type of school behavior was so well documented that it had become axiomatic to social scientists.

Other studies have found a moderate to weak association between SES and academic achievement. Knief and Stroud (1959) reported a cor-relation of .340 between SES and the composite score on the Iowa Test

74

of Basic Skills for 344 fourth graders. A correlation of .263 between SES and reading achievement and .284 with math achievement was reported by Fetter (1975) from the National Longitudinal Study of the class of 1972. Wright and Bean (1972) found correlations of .124, .089, and .072 between SES and verbal and quantitative scores on the Stanford Achievement Test and Grade Point average respectively. Hennessy (1976) reported a correlation of .136 between SES and verbal achievement as measured by the Comparative Guidance and Program test battery.72

Warner, Havighurst and Loeb (1944) discussed several earlier stud-ies of the relationship between socioeconomic status and student per-formance. One was a 1936 study conducted by Harlan Updegraff for the Pennsylvania State Department of Public Instruction and the American Youth Commission. Socioeconomic status and educational histories were obtained for a group of 910 students with IQs of 110 or above. Students were divided into two subgroups on the basis of SES. Ninety-three per-cent of students graduated from high school and 57% attended college in the upper SES group. In the lower socioeconomic group, 73% gradu-ated from high school and only 13% attended college. These findings indicate that even though the two groups were basically equal in in-tellectual ability, the higher SES group had significantly more educa-tional opportunity.73 A second study conducted by Helen Hoetsch (1940) of 1,023 students who graduated from high schools in Milwaukee, Wiscon-sin in 1937 and 1938, drew a similar conclusion. All of the students had IQs of 117 or above. The results showed that parents' income was directly related to college attendance. As parents' income increased,

73

(2) fathers' education, (3) Smothers-' education, (4) possessions in the home, (5) number of books in the home, and (6) number of rooms per person in the home. Home possessions were similar to those looked at in Coleman's research.

Wilson was unable to draw any firm conclusions concerning the re-lationship between social class and academic achievement; however, he did observe that youths from upper class backgrounds followed attainment sequences that differed significantly from those of blacks from lower class backgrounds.

SOCIOECONoMIC STATUS AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

Numerous studies show a strong relationship between socioeconomic status and academic achievement. Kelin (1971) reported that the esti-mated correlation between SES and science achievement for elementary school pupils was .802. A correlation of .755 between SES and Stanford Achievement test scores among suburban elementary school students was reported by Bunnell (1971). Stephenson and Mbres (1973) found a cor-relation of .865 between SES and standardized achievement test scores in big city schools. St. John (1971) stated that the relationship between SES and almost any type of school behavior was so well documented that it had become axiomatic to social scientists.

Other studies have found a moderate to weak association between SES and academic achievement. Knief and Stroud (1959) reported a cor-relation of .340 between SES and the composite score on the Iowa Test

75

the proportion of students who attended college increased.74

Sexton (1961) conducted a study of the relationship between edu-cation and income in a large midwestern city. The data examined this relationship for both elementary and high school students. IQ and achievement test scores were available for elementary school pupils but not for high school students. Trade, vocational, and technical schools were excluded from the study.

Social class was measured in aggregated units. First Sexton de-termined average family income levels in each school area. Schools of the same or similar income levels were then grouped together. School groups were ranked from the lowest to the highest based on income. The first group of elementary schools consisted of 33 schools with an aver-age family income range in 1957 of $3,500 to $4,857. The second group consisted of 107 schools with an average family income of between S5,300 to $6,695. Eighty-five schools were included in Group III. Average family income ranged from S7,100 to S8,500. Group TV, the highest class group, contained 20 schools with an average family income of over $9,ooO.75

Academic achievement was measured by scores on the Iowa Achieve-ment Test. The test is divided into five sections: language skills, work skills, arithmetic skills, reading, and vocabulary. The test was administered to fourth, sixth, and eighth graders. In all schools in which the income level was above $7,000, with the exception of eighth graders, students achieved at above average grade levels. In schools in which the average family income was below $7,000, average student

76

achievement was below grade level. The average achievement in schools in the highest income group was two whole years above that of students in schools in the lowest income group. Without exception, achievement scores rose with family income levels.76

Sexton stated that upper income groups were more successful in school because of their proficiency in language, reading, and verbal skills. Relatively speaking, lower income groups did well in arith-metic and work skills, while upper income groups performed poorly in these two areas in relation to their composite scores. Upper income groups did quite well on the reading section of the test. Lower income groups performed more poorly in reading than in all other areas. The fact that language, reading,and verbal skills are extremely important to overall academic success would at least in part account for the lower achievement of lower income groups.

"Social class is very apparent at the high school level in a num-ber of significant ways. Social class distinctions are also present within each high school, much more than within each elementary school."77 At the high school level, Sexton observed that failures were more pre-valent in the lower income groups. In Group I, 42.2t of students failed one or more subjects, whereas in Group V, 28.61 of pupils failed one or more subjects. Social studies and English were required courses in Big City schools. English was the more troublesome area for Group I students. There were 10.2% more failures in Group I than Group V. This finding substantiates White's (1982) and Bernstein's (1977 ) argument that the language patterns

of upper and lower class students

77

are different and that those of upper class students are more conducive to scholastic success. There was also a significantly greater represen-tation of upper SES groups in the higher curriculum levels compared to lwoer SES groups.

Sexton also addressed the race issue. The-income of blacks in Big City was significantly lower than that of whites. In 1958, the differ-ence between mean black and white income was $2,600. Some may claim that low income groups perform poorly in school because there are so many blacks in these groups. Sexton, hwoever, argued, that in low income

groups, students in predominantly black schools were achieving at approxi mately the same level as students in predominantly white schools. This

pattern was similar in upper class schools, as is illustrated by the fol-lowing statement:

Of course the social class position of Negroes is generally much worse than that of whites and much more "frozen" by pre-judice which limits their job opportunities and income levels, while providing inferior segregated education and housing in overcrowded, neglected ghetto areas. For Negroes, the class system has almost the rigidity of a caste system, and indeed could accurately be called a semi-caste system. Restricted by class walls, Negroes inevitably have special problems in school. Yet, it has been clearly demonstrated that, when the walls are scaled or broken down, Negro school achievement levels have improved remarkably.78

Sexton's point was that the lower achievement of blacks is a class prob-lem, but one that is seriously aggravated and complicated by racial discrimination.

Jencks (1972) estimated that a family's economic status probably correlates about 0.35 with children's test scores. What this means is

that the test schores of children whose fathers rank in the top fifth

of the occupational hierarchy will on the average be 13 to 15 points

78

higher than children whose fathers rank in the bottom fifth. If family income is used as a measure of SES, the disparity between these two groups will be less than 13 points. Jencks further stated that class differences appear to be greatest for verbal ability and gen-eral information. Test of mathematical skills, reading comprehension, and non-verbal ability are less influenced by economic background.

Epps (1974) studied SES and academic achievement among Northern and Southern blacks. The sample consisted of high school students in four schools in a large Southern city and 4 schools in a large Northern city. Originally, Epps planned to sample students in two biracial schools and two racially segregated schools in each city. This was ac-complished in the Northern city, but information from biracial schools could not be obtained in the South. There were 400 males and 566 fe-males in the Northern sample. The Southern sample consisted of 1,572 students, 721 males and 851 females. All data with the exception of grades was reported by students. Grades were obtained from school records.

A sixty-item version of Miner's (1957) vocabulary test was used as the measure of ability. School achievement was determined by students' grades in English, social studies, science, and arithmetic. Cumulative grade point averages were converted into a five-point scale. Either father's occupation or mother's education were the indicators of SES. Father's occupation was used to measure SES for Northern males and mother's education was the SES measure for all other groups.

Results showed that there was not a very strong relationship be-tween SES and school grades. Only among Southern females was SES

79

significantly correlated with grades. SES was found, however, to be positively related to vocabulary scores for all groups of students. Cbrrelation coefficients ranged from .18 to .2S. The relationship was slightly stronger for females than males, particularly in the South.

Fotheringham and Creal (1971) conducted a study of the academic achievement of 971 third graders who attended public and Roman Catholic schools in southern Ontario County CWelland). These 971 students were classified as above average, average, and below average achievers based on their performance on the Metropolitan Achievement Test QMAT). Thirty-five students from each group constituted the sample for the study. All 105 children were Canadian born, had both parents in the home, were from homes in which English was the principal language, and according to school nurses, were without evident neurological impairment. The study investigated the effects of both socioeconomic and educational and emo-tional atmosphere variables on achievement. The contribution of the SES variables was calculated separately from that of the eight educational and emotional atmosphere variables by performing a stepwise multiple re-gression analysis in which the four SES variables were entered before the family background variables. Family educational and emotional atmo-sphere will be discussed in the following section.

The SES variables were father's schooling, mother's schooling, father's occupation, and family income. For reading achievement, the multiple correlation of SES variables was .53, accounting for 28% of the variance in test scores. The multiple correlation for SES and arithmetic computation was .50, explaining 25% of the variance.

80

Fotheringham and Creal stated, however, that although SES variables related to children's intelligence and achievement scores, they provide little information on how these effects are mediated to the child.

Bond (1981) and Rossi (1961), in agreement with Fotheringham and Creal, argued that while there is widespread agreement on the existence of a socioeconomic status/academic achievement correlation, there is considerable controversy over the reasons for the correlation. Bond placed the explanations for this relationship into four basic categories which were: (1) the genetic argument, t2) the cultural argument, (3) arguments positing unequal educational treatment, and (4) explanations of educational differences as part of class analysis.

The genetic argument posits the genetic inferiority of lower socio-economic groups. Proponents of this position, including Jensen (1969) and Eysenck (1971), maintain that certain groups have low status because they are genetically inferior. According to this position, students from low SES groups who perform poorly in school do so because they lack the genetic ability to do otherwise. Compensatory education, therefore, would have little, if any, effect on the achievement of students from low SES backgrounds.

The cultural argument concentrates on the effects of the different cultural environments of children from various socioeconomic groups. Bernstein (1961), for example, argued that children are socialized to-ward speech codes that control access to either relatively context tied or relatively context independent meanings. "Elaborated codes," which are typical of middle class speech, free speech from its "evoking

81

social structure" and are based in articulate symbols. 'restricted"
codes, which are characteristic of lower class speech, are more tied

79 to a local social structure. Even if working and middle class child-ren possess similar vocabularies and share the same linguistic rule system, they may nevertheless use language differently in specific con-texts. Since schools are predicated upon elaborated codes, the working class student is placed at a disadvantage. The "culture of poverty" thesis also falls into this category of explanations for SES related academic failure. The basic argument postulates a deficient intellec-tual environment for lower class children and will be further discussed in the section on family culture. The cultural argument also takes into account the effects of the physical conditions of poverty such as inade-quate diet, overcrowding, and inadequate living conditions in general.

The third set of explanations for the relationship between SES and academic achievement is predicated upon the argument that lower class students receive inferior treatment from the educational establish-ment, are more likely to have inadequately trained teachers, are more likely to be placed in overcrowded classrooms, and have less money to spend on education than middle and upper class students. Karabel and Halsey (1977) and Leacock (1969) supported this position.

The low achievement of lower class students is often attributed to the role-of the educational system in maintaining class differences. Those adhering to this view of education maintain that as long as so-ciety remains divided on class lines, lower class children will perform poorly in school. Bowles (1977) viewed inequalities in education as

82

part of the evils of a capitalist society and maintained that these inequalities are likely to persist as long as capitalism survives. Education serves to legitimize the socioeconomic structure by deter-mining the position of children in the class structure.80

Two important conclusions were drawn in Bond's review. The first was that socioeconomic status is only one of the many aspects of human diversity contributing to educational achievement. It is, however, an extremely important aspect that should never be overlooked in evalu-ating the most appropriate educational treatment for any particular individual. The second was that the exact nature of the relationship between SES and academic achievement has not been fully researched because various scholars have tended to concentrate on one aspect of the relationship to the exclusion of others. The tendency has been to attribute low achievement to "cultural deprivation," poor schools, attitudes of teachers, children's low expectations, or the evils of the class system in general. All of these factors undoubtedly play a part; however, their relative significance is not clear.8]

Black families living in Gary, Indiana that participated in the Gary Negative Income Tax Experiment were the subjects of Mbrname, Maynard and Ohl's (1980) study. Average family income for the group was $5,200 in 1971, 55t of the average for the U.S. Three-fifths of the families were female headed. The study analyzed data for two samples of children. The first sample consisted of 529 students in grades 3 through 6 during the 1972-73 school year. The second consisted of students in the same grades during the following school year. Scores on the vocabulary sub-

s

test of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills were the measure of student achievement and were used as both a dependent variable and an indicator of prior achievement.

The results indicated that mothers who completed high school were more successful in helping children acquire cognitive skills than mothers who did not complete high school. The relationship between academic achievement and mother's high school completion was statis-tically significant for both the 1973 and 1974 samples.

Two alternative explanations concerning how the effects of this SES variable are mediated to the child were given. The first was that the importance of mother's education may reflect the quantity and quality of child care. The second was that the effects of mother's education may be indicative of genetically transmitted endowments. The authors suggested that since the effects of mother's education greatly exceeded the effects of father's education (in two parent households), the hy-pothesis that the mother's education influences patterns of child care which in turn effects achievement is the most plausible. Evidence did not support the hypothesis that children whose mothers worked outside of the home achieve less than those whose mothers are not employed out-side of the home. Family income was not found to be consistently related to achievement.

White (1982) stated that a fairly extensive review of the litera-ture on the relationship between SES and achievement leaves most readers confused. Correlations between SES and various measures of achievement generally range from .100 to .800. Reviews by Cuff (1933), Neff (1938),

84

Loevinger (1940), Havighurst (1961), Lavin (1965), Findley and Bryan (1970), Duncan, Featherman, and Duncan (1971), and Bryant, Glazer, Hansen, and Hirsh (1974) do not provide explanations of why there is so much variation in the magnitude of the correlations between SES and academic achievement reported in the published literature. Addition-ally, they do not attempt to determine the most reasonable estimate of the true or expected correlation between SES and achievement.82 White further stated that the available reviews cite results of from 10 to 20 studies and then discuss issues such as the pros and cons of various methods for collecting SES information, the theoretical causal relation-ship between SES and other variables, the relationship between SES and factors such as intelligence and ethnicity, or inequities that result from an unequal distribution of SES characteristics among the general population. The reader is usually either left with evidence from a relatively small number of nonrepresentative studies or sweeping gen-eralizations from which to draw conclusions about the strength of the relationship between SES and achievement. 3 White used the Fabrication Index, the Current Index to Journals in Education, ERIC documents (obtained by a computerized search), Dissertation Abstracts International, and bibliographies from other studies, to identify 248 studies for possible inclusion in his analysis. One hundred and one studies were actually examined. The remaining studies were excluded either because their content was considered inappropriate for the topic under investi-gation (they dealt only with philosophical issues or instrument develop-ment), or they did not report correlation coefficients or sufficient

85

information to calculate satisfactory estimates of the correlation coefficient.

White used meta-analysis techniques for integrating research findings, originally proposed by Glass (1976), to determine the magni-tude of the relationship between SES and academic achievement and to investigate factors contributing to the variance in previously reported correlations between achievement and SES. In meta-analysis, the re-viewer locates either all studies, or a sufficiently large representa-tive sample of studies, on a given topic. The results of each study are expressed in a common metric and the various characteristics of each study that may have affected its results are then quantified or coded. Common descriptive statistics (means, medians, standard deviations, and standard errors of measurement) and relational statistics (correlations, cross tabulations, multiple regression, and analysis of variance) are used to study the association of these characteristics across all studies with variations in outcomes. Typically obtained results of studies with given characteristics can be estimated because the results are expressed in a common metric.84 The selection of variables included in Whitets review was based on an extensive review of the literature, a pilot test of the coding instrument, and discussions with other scholars. The variables employed were as follows: (1) Unit of analysis used in computing the correlation coefficient, which were either aggregated, confounded, or student. Aggregated units referred to schools or school districts. Both the SES and achievement measures were averaged for the unit. When the unit of analysis was

86

confounded, SES was measured at the aggregate level and achievement
was measured at the individual student level or vice-versa. When both
SES and achievement were analyzed separately for each student, as is
the case in the present research, the student was identified as the
unit of analysis.

(2) Type of achievement measure, which was broken down into verbal, math,
science, composite achievement, IQ and other. IQ may in many cases be
a predictor of achievement, but does not necessarily determine actual
performance. Further, such tests tend to favor middle and upper class
white students (Havighurst and Newgarten, 1975).
(3) Grade level of students used in studies.

(4) SES reporting error, which was an estimate of the potential ac-
curacy of the SES measure. When parents reported this information, for
example, information was considered more accurate than if school of-
ficials estimated how various schools differed in respect to this
variable.

(5) Achievement range restriction, which ranged from no restriction
to substantial restriction. A sample consisting of students in a
given IQ range, for example, was considered as having a substantial
restriction.

(6) SES range restriction, which referred to the SES of the population
under investigation. If a sample consisted entirely of inner-city, low
income students, the restriction was considered substantial.
(7) Percent ethnic minority, which was the percentage of sample students
from a racial or ethnic minority (i.e., black, Chicano, Oriental, and

87

American Indian).
(8) Year of study, which was the year of publication.
(9) Number of items in the SES instrument.
(10) Number of students upon which correlation coefficients were based.
(11) Type of publication in which the literature was reported, i.e.,
journals, books and unpublished materials. Unpublished sources con-
sisted of theses, dissertations, and reports (such as project reports
in government contracts).
(12) Sample, which referred to whether samples were taken from a small
geographic region or were nationally representative. Mbst of the studies
were conducted in the United States, but a few were done in England or
Canada.
(13) Type of SES measure. SES variables were rated on a continuum de-
pendent upon whether they were represented in the instrument or whether
they were of major importance to the research. The SES measures were
as follows: (a) family income, (b) parent's education, (c) occupation
of the head of the household, (d) home atmosphere (parents' attitude
toward education, parents' aspirations for their children, and cultural
and intellectual activities of the family), (e) dwelling value, (f)
school resources, (g) subjective judgement, and Oh) other, including
number of siblings, ethnicity, and mobility of family. Home atmosphere
referred to whether parents created an environment that was conducive
to their childrens' learning. In other words, did parents read to their
children, help them with their homework, encourage them to go to college,
and take them to the library and to cultural events. It is important

88

here to recognize that home atmosphere is not a traditional measure of SES. Hbnff~ver, parents' education, family income, dwelling quality, or combinational measures utilizing one or more of these variables were overwhelmingly the most frequently used in the literature reviewed. (14) Number of SES groups, indicating how the SES variable was divided. (15) Lateral validity of the study. Examples of factors contributing to low internal validity included: (a) only using two extreme groups to compute correlations, (b) using ethnicity as a measure of SES, and (c) estimating the correlation coefficient from multiple T-tests.8S

White's results showed that for the sample of 101 studies, the best estimate of the correlation between SES and academic achievement is .251, indicating that the relationship between SES and achievement is probably much weaker than has been commonly assumed. The findings of high corre-lations between SES and achievement were attributed to the use of aggre-gated units of analysis and type of publication. Robinson (1977), as well as White, found that correlations computed Bated units will almost always be higher than correlations computed using individuals as the unit of analysis.

(1950), Knapp

using aggre-

White's analysis also showed that the more prestigious publications are more likely to publish results that are statistically significant, whereas a number of statistically insignificant but possibly valid findings go unreported in these publications. For studies published in books, the mean correlation between SES and achievement is .508. Studies published in journals and those that were unpublished had mean correla-tions of .343 and .242, respectively.

89

There was a slight trend to find weaker correlations when SES and achievement were restricted in range. The magnitude of the correlation decreased as the number of items in the SES measure decreased. The use of more than one indicator of SES increased the predictive reliability of the SES measure. Of all the traditional measures of socioeconomic status, income was found to be the highest single correlate of achieve-ment. White offered two explanations for these findings. The first was the increased availability of home items such as televisions, to people of all SES groups. Additionally, participation in community ac-tivities is not as restricted to the upper and middle classes as has been the case in the past. Secondly, compensatory education efforts have had a positive effect on reducing the strength of the relation-ship between socioeconomic status and achievement.

White concluded that SES is positively but only weakly correlated with achievement when the individual student is the unit of analysis and traditionally defined measures of SES are employed, which is most frequently the case. "In such situations, measures of SES can be ex-pected to account for less than 5t of the variance in student's achieve-ment. Correlations of that magnitude seriously restrict the utility of SES in most research applications."86 Because of this weak correla-tion, White argued, there is little utility in using SES as a covariate, stratifying variable, predictor, descriptive variable, or causal agent in studies of SES and achievement.

When schools or other aggregated groups are the unit of analysis, traditional SES measures are generally correlated strongly enough with

go

achievement measures to be useful as covariate, predictor, or strati-fying variables.87 In these cases, researchers should specify that grouped data were used and that correlations will be much higher than if individual students are the unit of analysis. It is important to note that the causal effects of SES are more relevant to individuals than to groups so even though correlations are higher when aggregate units are used, it is probably more appropriate to use the individual student as the unit of analysis.88

FAMI W CULTURE AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

"Despite the attention which relationships between home environ-ment variables and scholastic ability and attainment have received in the literature, our understanding in the area is not very good."89 Research focusing on material possessions in the home does not provide information about parental behaviors and attitudes that may influence achievement. Although Chicago and British school studies examine some characteristics of parents, they suffer from essentially the same prob-lem. The question of, '~hat characteristics do parents possess?" re-mains largely unanswered. Another factor complicating this type of research is the fact that many of the Chicago and British school studies were performed in countries there the stratification systems, general cultures, and policies toward education are quite different from those of the United States. While these studies sometimes look at the effects of ethnicity, the issue of race is not addressed.

91

In the United States, the "culture of poverty" argument, which postulates a deficient home intellectual environment for lower class children, has had important implications for educational research and government policy. The notion of a "culture of poverty" formulated by Lewis (1966), revolves around commonly held stereotypes about the poor who are believed to maintain the very conditions that consign them to failure. The alleged deficiencies of lower class culture that are thought to influence educational performance include a lack of verbal interaction between mother and child and between family members in gen-eral, a lack of interest in intellectual activities for their own sake, lack of parental involvement in schools, and a lack of emphasis on read-ing. As a result of these deficiencies, the lower-class child is locked into a self-perpetuating cycle of educational failure and poverty.90

The concept of "culture of poverty" is often used as a justifi-cation for not providing equal educational opportunity to lower class and black students. Lewis himself distinguishes between the life-ways of groups which he believed lived by a distinctive poverty subculture, those who are poor but do not possess such a subculture, and those who have gotten rid of the poverty subculture.91 In other words, all poor people do not necessarily possess the same attitudes and values, nor do they always behave in the same manner. Valentine (1971) examined Lewis' propositions concerning the social participation, values, and psychological characteristics of those living in the "culture of poverty." Lewis contended that at the local community level, those who live in the culture of poverty have a minimum of organization past the level of the

nuclear and extended family.92 Valentine stated, however, that the factual situation in the San Juan slum investigated by Lewis and evi-dence from similar communities is consistent with quite a different formulation. Low income districts have definite local social structures which commonly include groups and relationships similar or analogous to those found in communities that are not slums.93 Common analogous ele-ments include community councils, political ward organizations, conven-tional youth groups, block associations, personal social networks, and various human service institutions. Additionally, low income groups participate in social activities that are specialized adaptations to con-ditions of disadvantage and marginality such as civil rights or minority advancement groups, poverty-oriented social-change movements, adult blue-collar criminal associations, and other voluntary associations.94

Valentine also refutes Lewis' argument that those living by a "cul-ture of poverty" do not share the standard values of society. The poor share many or most of the major values associated with the dominant strata in American society. Values shared by the poor and other ele-ments of society probably include the belief that educational achieve-ment is desirable, self-sufficiency is an admirable quality, material comfort is a worthwhile goal, and that competition and cooperation are appropriate in different contexts. Lewis depicted those living in the "culture of poverty" as having a strong feeling of marginality, help-lessness, dependency, and inferiority; weak ego structures; a sense of resignation and fatalism; and being present-oriented. Valentine then argued that these "pessimistic" characteristics of the poor

93

are not personality disorders as suggested by Lewis, but are realistic perceptions and evaluations based on lifelong and intergenerational experiences imposed by the social order. Secondly, the fact that most poor people have managed to function as human beings under conditions of extreme adversity and deprivation is a tribute to the inner strength and flexibility of humanity. This far from indicates a psychological weakness.95

Investigations by Dave (1963), Wolf (1964), Bloom (1974), Reeves (1972) and Walberg and Mbrjoribanks (1976), have produced evidence to the effect that various process charactersitics of the home contribute more strongly to the prediction of children's abilities than do social status or family structure indices. Correlations as high as .70 with intelligence test scores and .85 with school achievement have been re-ported with the index used by Dave and Wolf.96 White stated that in the studies he reviewed, home atmosphere accounted for 4 to 11 times as much of the variation in academic achievement as did traditional measures of SES

Kellaghan (1977) studied the relationship between the home environ-ment and scholastic behavior of disadvantaged 8 and 9 year olds living in central Dublin, Ireland. The sample consisted of 30 girls and 30 boys attending eight different schools. Dave's (1963) questionnaire was used to obtain measures of six environmental process variables, which were: (a) achievement press--parental aspirations for the edu-cation of the child; (b) language model--quality of language usage of parents (e.g., pronunciation, vocabulary); (c) academic guidance--

94

extent to general supervision and suggestions regarding schoolwork; (d) family activeness--variety, frequency, and educational value of the activities of the family; (e) intellectuality of the home--variety and thought-provoking elements in toys and games available to the child; and (f) work habits of the family--degree of structure and routine in home management.97 Scholastic behavior was measured by scores on: (1) the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, a conventional test of general intelligence that yields a deviation IQ score; (b) the Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test, Scale I, a test of general mental ability; (c) the Marino Graded Word Reading Scale; (d) the Irish Word Recognition Test; and (e) the Schonell Mechanical Arithmetic Test.

Academic guidance predicted 12% of the variation in Cattell Chl-ture Fair scores. Twenty-six percent of the variance in Stanford-Binet scores was predicted by activeness of the family. Language model predicted 25% of the variation in Cattell Non-Culture Fair scores, and achievement press predicted 30% of the variance in arithmetic scores. Work habits and intellectuality of the home in combination predicted 40' of the variance in English reading scores and 36! of the variation in Irish reading scores. Mbasures of attainment were most closely re-lated to environmental factors.

Iverson and Walberg (1982) analyzed 18 studies of home environ-ment and achievement including those performed by Fraser (1959), Dave (1963), Dyer (1967), Weiss (1974), and Keeves (1972). The studies employed a variety of home environment measures, but the one most com-monly used was the Index of Educational Ehvironment

The studies

(IKE) used by Dave

95

and Wolf. Sample sizes for the studies ranged from 15 to 3,092. Eleven of the 18 studies were conducted outside of the United States and all were classified as either Chicago or British school studies. Like Kellaghan, Iverson and Walberg concluded that home factors are more highly correlated with measures of attainment (i.e., language, reading, arithmetic scores), than with IQ or intelligence. They also stated that Chicago school studies appear to be better measures of edu-cationally relevant home factors than British school studies. Their analyses also suggested that ability and achievement are more closely related to the socio-psychological environment and intellectual stimulation in the home than they are to socioeconomic status variables.

Mh~nane, Maynard, and Ohls (1980) looked at the effects of home goods inputs and time inputs on achievement. Two of their goods inputs measures, the availability of reading materials in the home and home ownership, are pertinent to this research. The subjects of the study were black families living in Gary, Indiana. Average family income for the group in 1971 was $5,200, 55% of the national average, and three-fifths of the families were female-headed. Five hundred and twenty-nine students in grades 3 through 6 during the 1972-1973 school year and 562 pupils in the same grades during the 1973-1974 school year constituted the same. Scores on the vocabulary subtest of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills were the measure of achievement. None of the variables they used describing physical resources in the home, including the availability of reading materials, were found to be consistently re-lated to student achievement. This finding was inconsistent with the

96

majority of research on the subject. does not necessarily mean that goods inputs do not influence achieve-ment and suggested that the fact that home resources are available does not necessarily mean that children derive any particular benefit from them. The effects of these resources, they posited, appear to be medi-ated through the educational level of mothers.

Beeves En 972) viewed the home environment in terms of structure, parent's attitudes, and processes. The structural dimension of the home was determined by (a) father's educational level, (b) father's

They stated, however, that this

occupation, (c) mother's occupation before marriage, (d) stated reli-gious affiliation, and (e) number of children in the family. Fire variables characterized the attitudinal dimension of the home. They were: (a) father's attitudes toward the child's present education, (b) mother's attitudes toward the child's present education, (c) father's ambitions for the child's future education and occupation, (d) mother's ambitions for the child's future education and occupation, and (e) prents' hopes and aspirations for themselves. The process dimension of the home was assessed by determining (a) parents' reports of favor-able relations between home and school, (b) use of books and library facilities (by the student), (c) provision of help with formal school work, and (d) arrangements made for tackling homework assignments. Keeves looked at the relationship between these home environment characteristics and student ac R evement in mathematics and science for Australian 11 and 12 year olds. The measure of ac R evement used was not specified.

97

The results of the path analysis Keeves performed indicated that the major factor influencing final achievement in mathematics was initial achievement, but both the attitudes of the home and initial attitudes of students toward mathematics had a small but statistically significant effect. Initial achievement accounted for 68.4% of the variation in final achievement scores. Only another 5.2% of the varia-tion in mathematics achievement was explained by home, classroom, and peer group environments. It is important to note, however, that ini-tial achievement was related to home, classroom, and peer influences. Initial achievement in sciences, the attitudes and practices of the home, structural characteristics of the classroom, and the interaction between the teacher and student, influenced science achievement. These results support other findings, including those of Dave (1963), which indicate that the home factors influencing achievement differ according to the nature of the subject,

Blau's C1981) analysis of the determinants of intellectual com-petence and achievement of black and white children concentrated more on family cultural variables as defined in the present research than on any of the other research examined. Five hundred seventy-nine black and 523 white mothers of fifth and sixth graders in three Chicago metro-politan area communities were interviewed in 1968. Students were from working and middle class families. The most recent IQ and achievement test scores were obtained for each child. The type of achievement test utilized was not specified.

One of the parent characteristics Blau looked at was participation

s

98

in voluntary associations. Mother's extrafamilial participation was found to be related to both SES variables and student achievement. The relationship between SES and organizational memberships was stronger for blacks than whites. For blacks, the correlations between extra-familial participation and mother's education, father's education, and mother's occupational status were .43, .32, and .31 respectively. For whites, the correlations between participation in voluntary associa-tions and SES components were .31, .30, and .32, respectively. Child-ren's mean IQ and achievement scores rose with the extent of mother's organizational memberships in both races. The relationship between IQ scores and mother's organizational affiliations was stronger for blacks (r-.21) than whites (r=.13). The relationship between mother's organizational memberships and achievement scores was similar for blacks (r=.l9) and whites r=.17).

Blau used three items to measure ''paternal fatalism," a concept similar to Rotter's (1966) "generalized expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement." The items were: (1) children should be taught not to expect too much out of life so that they won't be disappointed, (2) children should learn early that there isn't much you can do about the way things are going to turn out in life, and (3) children should learn that planning only makes a person unhappy, since your plans hardly ever work out anyway.98

Fatalism was found to have an adverse effect on all measures of

positive investment of time and resources in children and was negatively

associated with students' achievement test and IQ scores for blacks

and whites. Early interaction between mothers and children, preschool mastery of skills, the provision of culturally enriching experiences, and the reading of material by experts on children were all found to be negatively associated with achievement.

As Table 3.6 shows, fatalism has a stronger negative association with achievement than IQ for blacks and whites. Blau interpreted this

TABLE 2.6
CORRELATIONS OF FATALISM WITH COMPONENT MEASURES OF INVESTMENT IN CHILD
AND CHILDREN'S ACHIEVEMENT99

Early interaction
Read experts
Mastery
Cultural enrichment
IQ
Achievement

Blacks Whites

-.25 -.18
-.19
-.17
-.22
-.21

-.35 -.12 -.29 -.18 -.29

finding as suggestive of the proposition that the communication of a fatalistic orientation is more damaging to children's progress in school as the tasks they are called on to learn become more difficult.l°°

Mbthers were asked three questions designed to determine their aspirations for their children's educational attainment, scholastic ex-cellence, and occupational attainment. The questions were: (1) What is the least amount of education that you think would be enough for


100

your (son or daughter)? (w) Would you be satisfied if (child) were passing; at the middle of (his/her) class; above the middle; out-standing? and (3) Would (child) be doing well enough if (he/she) had a job like ? OExamples of nonskilled, skilled, clerical, and professional occupations were provided.)l°l Mothers were also asked how far they expected their children to go in school. Performance on IQ and achievement tests was more highly correlated with maternal aspiration level for whites (.36 and .38, respectively) than for blacks (.27 and .26, respectively). This finding can in part be attributed to the fact that black mothers' aspirations for their childrenst edu-cation were as high or higher than those of white mothers. The correla-tion between mother's educational expectations and IQ was .33 for blacks and .36 for whites. For whites, the correlation between educational expectations and achievement scores was .41 compared to .36 for blacks. Blau interpreted these findings as an indication that the educational expectations voiced by black mothers may be more influenced by their children's demonstrated scholastic ability than are their aspirations.

Blau also investigated the relationship between family size and achievement. Family size was found to be a stronger predictor of achievement for blacks than for whites, There was a 10-point differ-ence in the mean IQ scores of black children in hones with one or two children (102) and those in homes with five or more children (92). The corresponding difference for whites was seven points tl09 and 102, respectively). Differences in achievement scores followed a similar pattern for both races.

101

Pbthers' participation in voluntary activities, aspirations for children's education, fatalism, and family size were found to be related either directly or indirectly to some indicator of SES.

Puny studies of the relationship between family characteristics and academic achievement investigate the relationship between parents' aspirations for their children's education. Babcock's (1972) conten-tion that high achieving children generally come from families with high educational expectations for them even though definitions of ex-pectations or aspirations vary, is supported in the majority of research. Crandall, Dewey, Katkowsky, and Preston (1964) defined parents' educa-tional aspirations as parents' minimal standards for children's in-tellectual performance. Their results showed that parents' aspirations were moderately correlated with girl's school achievement. The cor-relation between parents' educational aspirations and achievement was much smaller for boys than for girls. A moderate relationship between parents' aspirations and academic performance was also reported by Woelfel and Haller (1971), Keeves (1972) and St. John (1972). Gigliotti and Brookover (1975) reported a strong relationship between student achievement and parents' educational aspirations. Pugh (1976) concluded that the effects of parents' aspirations on academic performance were negligible for black and white male high school seniors. The number of years of school that parents expected their sons to complete was the measure of educational expectations in the Pugh study.

102

CHAPTER III
THE RESEARCH PROJECT: ITS St-l-lING,
MOTIVATION, POLITICAL BASIS, AND METHODOLOGY

Findings from a 1976 study entitled "Options: School Desegrega-tion," provided the incentive for the present investigation. The re-search was initiated in September of 1975, just a few months prior to the federal court order to desegregate the public schools in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The Milwaukee community was preparing to implement the mandates of the impending court order. Individuals, civic organiza-tions, the media, business interests, and segments of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee community, were among the supportive participants in the desegregation planning process. One of the organizations in-volved, the Coalition for Peaceful Schools, consisted of representatives from various segments of the Milwaukee community. The Coalition was made up of a number of groups including the Greater Milwaukee Conference on Religion and Urban Affairs, the NAACP, the Milwaukee City Council of PTA's, and the Department of Urban Affairs at UW-M. Coalition activities included sponsoring a human relations training workshop at the YMCA, distributing over 950 informational packets listing community resources on the desegregation issue, and assisting local school prin-cipals in the implementation of desegregation related programs.] Milwaukee Junior Bar Association lawyers explained the legal aspects of desegregation to interested groups. The League of Women Voters engaged in a number of desegregation related activities, such as sponsoring a conference designed to assist community interests in the

103

development of communication techniques to disseminate information on desegregation, and submitting policy statements and recommendations to the school board.2

"Options: School Desegregation" was an investigation of the plan-ning processes, specific desegregation techniques employed (such as magnet schools and educational parks), patterns of community response, and problems encountered in desegregating five urban school districts. The declining educational quality in large urban school districts and arguments for and against desegregation were among other issues ad-dressed.

While the project did not directly address the relationship be-tween socioeconomic status, family culture, and academic achievement in interracial schools, several observations indicated that these is-sues are of major importance if equality in educational opportunity is to become a reality. The first observation was that many urban school systems were not providing students with an education that would prepare them for further education and gainful employment in today's market. The quality of education in urban school districts was rapidly deteriorating and desegregation could not be held responsible. In Pontiac, Michigan, for example, the quality of education provided was a problem the district had faced for many years.3 In 1972, a civic organization leader informed U.S. Commission on Civil Rights staff members that desegregation had helped the community to see what a poor job the schools were doing.4 Funds received under the Emergency School

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 & hoof 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

-MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE- -MORE-

104

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

5/8 /85
Date

Graduate School Approval

Date



Copyright by Pamela Jane Sampson-Malone, 1985,1998
All Rights Reserved