Mathematics and Poverty: What is the Connection?

In our schools today, we recognize and acknowledge all sorts of students from various backgrounds, including English Language Learners (ELL); students with disabilities; students with learning disabilities; students with behaviour difficulties; autism; anxiety disorder; gifted students; Aboriginal Students; boys as unique learners; and so on. Today’s teaching landscape does not pretend that the playing field is equal, and rightfully so. Teachers need to be fully aware of their students’ needs and strengths and in many cases these days, they are supported to do so in a relevant manner. Except for one issue that we prefer not to talk about, and that of course, is poverty.

In many respects, the playing field is not equal. Students with socio-economic issues (i.e. poor or impoverished students) come to school deprived of many of the building blocks for success that students from middle and upper class families can take for granted. For example, many students from lower-income backgrounds are not introduced to reading and books until they reach Kindergarten, putting them at serious disadvantage when it comes to their same age peers from higher income brackets. Despite wide acknowledgement of the effects of poverty, it remains the monkey in the room. For example, Ontario teachers can take an Additional Qualification course on several different exceptionalities (http://www.oct.ca/members/services/findanaq), but there is nothing offered on poverty, one of the factors that effects students the most. Eric Jensen illustrates just how much poverty affects children in school in his book entitled “Teaching With Poverty in Mind: What Being Poor Does to Kids’ Brains and What Schools Can Do About It” (2009). He cites issues as varied as: school attendance (which is deeply connected to drop-out rates); negative parent attitude; attendance at a poorly maintained school (with less qualified teachers); a sense of alienation from school in general (http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109074/chapters/Understanding-the-Nature-of-Poverty.aspx). As you can tell from the above list, poverty is screaming to be recognized as a major factor in students’ lives. I believe that the seriousness of the issue demands that as teachers we take a stand so that these students do not fall through the cracks of the education system.

Seeing how this is intended to be a blog about Math, I will offer here strategies that are specific to that subject, though as with many differentiation strategies, these can and should be generalized to other subject areas.

Payne (2008), suggests that we “Translate the Concrete into the Abstract” (http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/apr08/vol65/num07/Nine-Powerful-Practices.aspx). This is essential for Mathematics, but doubly so for students living in poverty who may have had less access to abstract concepts. Payne refers to this process as providing “mental models”. For students living in poverty this can incorporate stories and situations that relate to their life experiences, i.e. the things they are experiencing in their immediate neighborhood, in their school community or in the community at large. For example, several years ago when I was teaching a unit on measurement, we used examples from the neighborhood (soccer field and local skating rink), to teach the abstract concepts of area and perimeter.

For new teachers, it will take time to get to know the neighborhood and community of the students you are teaching. It may also require that you examine some of your own stereotypes about the neighborhood and the community in general. Realistically, the only way to truly understand a community is to spend time in it, with the people that live there. I addressed this concept recently in an article I published in the SRV Journal entitled, “More than Just a Tourist: Interpersonal Identification & the Elementary School Teacher” (http://srvip.org/Journal_Jan_2014_TOC.pdf). In the article, I speak about ways to help teachers identify with their students, while also fostering positive identification in the other direction, from students to teachers.

Heiman (2010), suggests teaching the “verbalization of math steps” (p. 4). This would be an easy concept to integrate into a three-part lesson, especially in part 1, where students could recite the steps back to the teacher. This strategy is often used to help English Language Learners, but would also benefit other students who are less comfortable with written language (http://www.learningtolearn.com/data/BridgingTheMathAchievementGapLTL.pdf).

The final suggestion I’ll leave you with is to teach your students to ask questions. This becomes key in part 3 of a three-part math lesson, as it is an opportunity for teachers to check their students’ understanding and offers students a chance to restate their learning for both themselves and their peers. While this may come naturally to some children, depending on their background, some students from impoverished backgrounds may not have the same confidence in asking questions to reinforce their understanding. Payne (2008) suggests placing students in pairs and having them practice on each other in order for them to gain confidence in doing this in front of their peers and teacher in the whole group setting.