The Fish Versus The Fisherman Annemarie M. Grassi, Ph.D.
MAY, 2003
Why Do Our Kids Fail to Succeed? Inequalities in Life
Inequalities in Educational $$ Orange CMSD Euclid <$20K $50K - $70K >$150K 7000 19000 $6,600 $18,196 5250 14250 $11,820 3500 $10,721 9500 1750 4750 $780 $300 0 0 Parental Educational Spending Per Pupil Spending Source: US Department of Labor Source: Ohio Department of Education State Report Card
Inequality in Education @ Home • Parenting style typical of affluent and educated parents, characterized by nurture, affection, warmth, active involvement, and reasoned discipline (more hugging, less spanking) leads to greater socio- emotional competence among children - Putnam, 2015 • Well educated parents aim to raise autonomous, independent, self-directed children with high self- esteem and the ability to make good choices • Less educated parents focus on discipline and obedience and conformity to pre-established rules.
Inequality in Reinforcement Professional Working Poor Class Class Class 166,000 62,000 26,000 Encouragements (6:1) (2:1) (1:3) Discouragements 26,000 36,000 57,000 The American Dream, Our Kids in Crisis - Robert Putnam (2015)
Traditional Approaches to Catching Fish Meeting Immediate Needs Providing a safe space for the time Focusing only on how kids feel, not what they can achieve Focus on outputs over outcomes Focus on “good work” not “great impact”
What our Kids need to Succeed Unconditional Love High Expectations Traditions Affection Responsibility Continuous Support Accountability Supported Failure Tough Love
Holistic Approach to Breaking the Cycle of Poverty Strong Relationships Family Engagement Duration and Intensity of Programming Focus on Social and Emotional Growth
Strong Relationships “The best documented asset of resilient children is a strong bond to a competent and caring adult, which need not be a parent” (Masten and Reed, 2002, pp. 83). Strong relationships between youth and adult mentors plays a significant role in the academic and social achievement of youth and might therefore also serve an important role in a youth’s social network. (Anderson et.al, 2004).
Strong Partnerships The benefits of these collaborations Decker, 2000 include: • Strong partnerships can Greater relevance of curriculum for closely align the work of the students • school day to the interactive Increased student responsibility for learning nature of after school, • Improved connections between school providing a rich environment and community for learning. • Stronger problem-solving skills • Higher order thinking, time management Successful after school • Expanded learning environments programs recognize the • Greater motivation of reluctant learners importance of strong enhanced problem solving and conflict community connections and management skills actively pursue them. • Reduced behavior problems
Strong Relationships What do strong peer-adult relationships look like?
Family Dynamics Estimated by the time children enter • kindergarten: The children of professional families • heard 19 million more words than the children of working class parents and; 32 million more words than the children • of parents on welfare. - Putnam, 2015 72% of middle-class children know the • alphabet when starting school, as opposed to only 19% of poor children - Putnam, 2015 Growing evidence indicates that children • who grow up in poverty are at high risk for elevated levels of cortisol and toxic stress - Travis, Western, and Redburn (2014); and Waldfogel (2006)
Family Engagement FAMILY FAMILY INVOLVEMENT ENGAGEMENT To engage is to “come together To involve is to “enfold or and interlock” - Listening to envelope”- Identifying what parents think, dream or projects, needs, and goals worry about and then telling parents how they can contribute
Family Engagement Strong'Culture' Meaningful' Engagement' • High'Expecta5ons' • Skin'in'the'Game' • Family'Programming' • “Village”'Partnership' • Parent'Programming' Family'Support' Feedback' • Services' • Mul5ple'outlets'for' parent'voice'and' • Strong'caring' input' rela5onships' Family'
Continuum of Service Duration of Programming (Darling, 2005) Looked at student attitude and engagement in school among students who participated in extracurricular activities for the duration of 1, 2, or 3 years. • Results found that students who remained in programming for 2 or 3 years demonstrated greater academic aspirations than those who only participated 1 year or did not participate at all. • Results also revealed a positive relationship between middle and high school students who engaged in programming for 3 years as it related to multiple positive young adult outcomes.
Continuum of Service Duration of Programming - (Grassi, 2012) • Does duration of engagement in Open Doors Academy relate to student performance in achievement related behaviors including hope, wellbeing, and engagement? • Analysis and Findings- Single Factor MANOVA (rationale: comparison of multiple IV’s (time in ODA) on multiple DV’s(achievement related behaviors)). Statistically significant main effects between duration of engagement amongst Open Doors Academy Youth and hope, engagement, and wellbeing Pillai’s criterion (12,510) = 1.83, p = .042. • Does duration of engagement in Open Doors Academy relate to academic performance as reflected in student GPA? • Analysis and Findings- Pearson-R Correlation (rationale: measuring strength of linear dependence between duration in program and academic performance). Found statistically significant difference according to years of engagement [( F (4, 211) = 2.47, p = .046)] in relationship to grade point average.
Creating a Continuum Middle School High School College/ Trade School Career/ Adulthood
ODA Scholar Retention 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 1st to 2nd Year 2nd to 3rd Year 3rd to 4th+ Years
Benefits of the Continuum Three young college ladies meet for lunch:)
Social Emotional Growth Engagement and Hopefulness Are hope, wellbeing, and engagement (Grassi, 2012) predictive of academic performance, (measured by GPA) amongst youth Do youth engaged in Open Doors participating in ODA? Academy differ from youth not exposed to Open Doors Academy in relation to achievement related behaviors including Confidence hope, wellbeing, and engagement? Self-Esteem Motivation Findings - Statistically significant Self- Perseverance difference between ODA Youth and Non- Regulation Personal ODA Youth Volition Power 67% of ODA youth Hopeful 47% of Non-ODA youth Hopeful Statistically significant with approximately 6% of the variability in 65% of ODA youth Engaged grade point average predicted by hope, 47% of Non-ODA youth Engaged engagement, and wellbeing.
Figure 1. Youth Identified as Increasingly Hopeful, Engaged, and Thriving Amongst Youth Participating in Open Doors Academy For One to Four Years 3.0 AMONGST 2.8 ANTS SCROE AM ARTICIPAN 2.5 Hope AVERAGE S Engagement PAR Wellbeing 2.3 2.0 ZERO ONE TWO THREE FOUR YEAR ARS I IN O OPEN D DOORS A ACAD ADEMY
Social Emotional Growth Table 2. Chi-Square Test for Independence on Graduation, New Ideas, Goal Setting, and Job Placement Confidence (scale of 1 to 5) M Pearson Chi- p n Square I know I will graduate high school Open Doors Academy 4.58 3.17 .075 188 Non Open Doors Academy 4.06 I energetically pursue my goals Open Doors Academy 2.70 3.59 1 .058 190 Non Open Doors Academy 1.77 I can think of many ways to get good grades Open Doors Academy 3.21 1.38 .249 191 Non Open Doors Academy 2.66 I know I will find a good job after I graduate Open Doors Academy 3.86 6.67 2 .010 185 Non Open Doors Academy 2.74
Raising Fishermen Garner Buy In Set the Bar High Minimize Gaps between systems of inequality Teach Responsibility and Ownership Foster Autonomy and Mutual Respect Accept Failure, Promote Success
MISSION STATEMENT ODA CORE VALUES O p e n D o o r s A c a d e m o y f s e e d r v u c e a s t a i o s n a , f i o n u v e n d s t a i n t i g o n i n t h o e f l i i f t e s - ’ l s o t a n g f f , l e s a t Shared Social u r d n i e n n g t s , a n d f a m i l i e s . Responsibility W e s e e k t o p r o t e c t , i c n h s a p l l i e r e n , g n e u y r o t u u r t e h a t n o d r e a c h t h e i r f u l l p o t e n Perseverance t i a l Culture of Excellence Civility Life-Long Learning
Breaking the Cycle of Poverty Strengthen( Internal( Regula.on( Exposure(to(the( Increased(Support( around(Transi.ons( Global(World( Strengthen(Skills( Focus(on(Inves.ng( and(Values( Back(
PROTECT - INSPIRE - NURTURE - CHALLENGE Summer High School Enrichment Programming Programming Middle Family School Engagement Programming PINC
Recommend
More recommend
