Bad Neighborhood, Bad Academic Outcomes?

1
Bad Neighborhood, Bad Academic Outcomes?

• The Effects of Neighborhood Environment and
  Socioeconomic Status on Academic Participation

Brandi Renee Beard California State University,
Northridge
2
Purpose

• To assess the effects of socioeconomic status and
  crime in a neighborhood on academic participation
  and performance.
• To add to the sociology of education knowledge
  base concerning the role of non school factors on
  academic achievement and performance
• To influence policy that will reform the public
  education system to better address factors that
  increase or help to maintain the achievement gap

3
Theories

• The theory of capital deficiency
• Disorganization theory
• Collective socialization theory

4
The Theory of Capital Deficiency

• Financial Capital
• Human Capital
• Social Capital
• Cultural Capital

5
Financial Capital

• monetary resources that can be used to provide
  children with comfortable living situations, good
  schooling, private tutors, extracurricular
  activities, good nutrition and other intellectual
  stimuli.

6
Human capital

• Refers to the skills, abilities, and knowledge
  possessed by specific individuals. Parents with
  high education can usually offer large amounts of
  human capital to their children
• parents invest in children in the same way
  that entrepreneurs invest in a company, seeking
  to maximize their ultimate payoff- in this case
  happiness, productivity, SES, and prestige of
  their descendants in society Massey (20035)

7
Social Capital

• a network of resources given to people as a
  virtue of inclusion in a certain social structure

8
Cultural Capital

• knowledge of norms, styles, conventions, tastes
  that help individuals to navigate specific social
  settings that better their odds at success.
• Exposure to prior knowledge of the social
  conventions can be critical in preparing students
  for achieving success in a school environment
  Massey (20036)

9
Social Disorganization Theory

• Originally linked crime in neighborhood to
  ecological characteristics.
• This theory is commonly used in criminology and
  deviance studies however sociologists of
  education also use this to link neighborhood
  environments to academic achievement
• This theory argues that place matters!
• Explains street level crime at the neighborhood
  level

10
Collective Socialization Theory

• Lack of role models in poor and minority
  communities
• Students living in inner city ghettos endorse the
  American ideologies (hard work yields success)
  however their experiences in their neighborhood
  does not exemplify this ideology
• A lack of opportunity may cause these students to
  develop an oppositional culture
• Students develop adaptive behaviors and attitudes
  that discourage success in school
• Poor and minority students lack exposure to the
  correct attitudes and behaviors that lead to
  academic achievement

11
Methods

• Population and sample
• Modes of data collection
• Variables used
• Factorial MANOVA

12
Sample

• Education Longitudinal Study 2002 (ELS) was
  accessed via ICPSR
• A stratified probability proportional to size was
  used to select a nationally representative sample
• The ELS identified 1,221 eligible schools from a
  population of 27,00 schools containing 10th
  graders. The eligible schools included public,
  catholic and other private schools. Of those
  eligible schools, 752 participated in the study.
  The schools selected 26 sophomores to participate
  in the study from each school.
• The ELS collected data from 20,000 sophomore
  students

13
Data Collection

• Researchers used the following modes of data
  collection
• self-enumerated questionnaire
• computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI)
• mail questionnaire
• cognitive assessment test.

14
Factorial MANOVA

• Assumptions
• The observations within each sample must be
  randomly sampled and must be independent of
  each other
• The observations on all dependent variables must
  follow a multivariate normal distribution in each
  group
• Homogeneity of covariance
• The relationships among all pairs of DVs for
  each cell in the data matrix must be linear

15
Variables

• Dependent Variables
• BYS43- the amount of hours per week that a
  student reads outside of school
• BYS34B- the number of hours per week that a
  student spends on homework
• BYTXCSTD- Standardized test composite
  score-math/reading
• Independent Variables
• SES1- socioeconomic status (parents occupational
  prestige, income, and parents highest level of
  education)
• BYP67 - level of crime in neighborhood

16
Hypotheses
17
Research Hypotheses

• The level of crime in a neighborhood will have an
  effect on the number of hours per week a student
  spends reading outside of school
• The level of crime in a neighborhood will have an
  effect on the number of hours per week a student
  spends on homework outside of school
• The level of crime in a neighborhood will have an
  effect on the students composite standardized
  test score
• Socioeconomic status will have an effect on the
  amount of hours per week a student spends reading
  outside of school
• Socioeconomic status will have an effect on the
  amount of hours per week a student spends on
  homework outside of school
• Socioeconomic status will have an effect on the
  students composite standardized test score

18
Research hypotheses-interaction effects

• The interaction between socioeconomic status and
  crime in a neighborhood will have an effect on
  the number of hours per week a student spends on
  homework
• The interaction between socioeconomic status and
  crime in a neighborhood will have an effect on
  the number of hours per week a student spends
  reading outside of school
• The interaction between socioeconomic status and
  crime in a neighborhood will have an effect on
  the composite standardized test scores of
  students

19
Results and Discussion
20
Results Tests of Between Subjects Effects
21
Interpretation SES

• Socioeconomic status has a significance of .000
  for the number of hours spent per week on reading
  and homework and on the students standardized
  test score. Therefore I can conclude that SES has
  an effect on academic participation and
  performance. I reject my null hypothesis and find
  support for my first, second, and third research
  hypotheses.

22
Interpretation-Level of Crime

• Level of crime in the students neighborhood has a
  significance of .003 for the number of hours per
  week a student spends on homework outside of
  school. Therefore I conclude that the level of
  crime in a neighborhood has an effect on the
  number of hours a student spends on homework
  outside of school. I can reject my null
  hypothesis and find support for my second
  research hypothesis.
• Level of crime in the students neighborhood has a
  significance of .011 for the number of hours per
  week a student spends on reading outside of
  school. Therefore I conclude that the level of
  crime in a neighborhood has an effect on
  endorsing the value of reading. I can reject my
  null hypothesis and find support for my first
  research hypothesis.
• Level of crime in a neighborhood has a
  significance of .000 when testing for its effects
  on the students composite standardized test
  scores. This permits me to conclude that crime
  level in the students neighborhood has an effect
  on his/her standardized test score. Therefore, I
  can find support for my third research
  hypothesis.

23
Interpretation Continued

• The p-value for the interaction effect of SES and
  crime in the neighborhood is .632 when testing
  for the number of hours per week spent on
  homework outside of school. This permits me to
  conclude that the interaction between SES and
  crime in the neighborhood is not significant.
  Therefore, I accept my null hypothesis and reject
  my first interaction research hypothesis
• The p-value for the interaction effect of SES and
  crime in the neighborhood is .016 when testing
  for the number of hours per week spent on reading
  outside of school. Therefore, I can conclude that
  this interaction effect is significant. In final
  I find support for my second interaction research
  hypothesis and reject my null hypothesis.
• The p-value for the interaction effect of SES and
  crime when testing for the students composite
  standardized test score is .021. Therefore, I can
  conclude that this interaction effect is
  significant I can I find support for my third
  interaction research hypothesis.

24
Discussion

• The level of crime in a students neighborhood
  and the students socioeconomic background are
  important factors when assessing students
  academic participation and performance in school.
  However, the interaction between SES and crime in
  the neighborhood does not have an effect on the
  amount of hours per week a student spends on
  homework. The results support the theory of
  capital deficiency insofar as SES had an effect
  on all dependent variables. Additionally, crime
  had an effect on all the DVs used in the present
  study thus supporting social disorganization
  theory as it applies to education. However, other
  factors would have to be tested to find support
  for collective socialization.

25
Future Research and Policy Suggestions
26
Policy Reform

• Policy makers interested in closing the
  achievement gap should address social issues in
  the community as well as inequalities in the
  school
• Community based programs should be tailor to each
  community with a goal of addressing the unique
  issues within that neighborhood while providing
  academic support for youth
• Education reformers should adopt a model of
  contamination as exampled by the Harlem
  Childrens Zone in high crime neighborhoods

27
Future Research

• Future research should
• identify the types of crime that has the highest
  effects on academic achievement and participation
• Identify the differences in the effects presented
  in the current study by race and ethnic
  background
• Include variables that assess how many people in
  the neighborhood works, are good role models, and
  can offer helpful resources to the youth in the
  community to better test collective socialization
  theory

28
References

• Ainsworth, James W. 2002. Why Does it Take a
  Village? The Mediation of Neighborhood Effects on
  Educational Achievement Social Forces. 81(1)
  117-152. 
• Buchman, Claudia, Dennis J. Condron and Vincent
  J, Roscigno. 2010. Shadow Education, American
  Style Test Preparation, the SAT, and College
  Enrollment. Social Forces 89 (2)435-461 
• Condron, Dennis J. and Vincent J. Roscigno. 2003.
  Disparities Within Unequal Spending and
  Achievement in an Urban School District.
  Sociology of Education. 76 (1)18-36.
• Lareau, Annette. 2000. Home Advantage Social
  Class and Parental Intervention in Elementary
  School. Maryland Rowman and Littlefield
  Publishers INC.
• Massey, Douglas S., Camille Z. Charles, Garvey F.
  Lundy and Mary J. Fischer. 2003. The Source of
  the River The Social Origins of Freshman at
  Americas Selective Colleges and Universities.
  Princeton Princeton University Press. Chapter 1
  The Puzzle Minority of Underachievement.
• Reardon, Sean. 2012. The Widening Academic
  Achievement Gap between the Rich and the Poor.
  Community Investments 24(2)19-39.