Issue link: http://educator.cta.org/i/48466
ized tests," says education expert and author Diane Ravitch. "The achieve- ment gap exists before children enter school. Some children have consistent access to good nutrition, good medical care, educated parents, safe and healthy neighborhoods — and some don't. All of this affects children's readiness to learn. We know that economic conditions affect test scores, because every testing program shows differential success in relation to fam- ily income: Children from affluent families have the highest scores, and children whose families have the least income have the low- est scores. This reflects different experiences and different access to opportunity." Research from Gerald Bracey shows America's scores are low in comparison with other countries — only when there is a high percentage of children who are living in poverty. His research found that American students attending schools with low poverty rates actually did quite well. Poverty has been linked to lower read- ing levels by www.kidsdata.org. Statewide, just 30 percent of eco- nomically disadvantaged children scored proficient or higher on the state's English-language arts stan- dardized test. Students in higher-income families did twice as well. Low-income stu- dents also score lower on Advanced Place- ment test scores. When poor students only at tend school with other poor students, achieve- ment is impacted. "Many students are burdened with going to economically segregated schools, where almost every student is poor," says Ravitch. "This depresses their motivation, since they are surrounded by a community that has been left behind." EDUCATION CUTS HURT POOR CHILDREN MORE According to the California Budget Project, California ranks 46th in the U.S. in K-12 spending per student, having spent $2,856 less per student than the rest of the U.S. last year. In the past four years, California has cut $20 billion from schools and colleges. This has had a greater impact on students who are poor and already at a disadvantage. Poor students whose parents are not college educated benefit the most from counselor services. However, 29 California school districts have no counseling program at all, according to the California Depart- ment of Education. The ratio of students per counselor in this state is 945-to-1, compared with the national average of 477-to-1, rank- ing California last in the nation. A report from UCLA's Institute for Democracy, Education and Access shows that California's low-income students suf- fer disproportionately compared with more affluent students (see sidebar). "The findings point to tremendous needs of California students and Cali- fornia public schools — needs that the federal government is best positioned to address in the short term," concludes the report. "The short term is crucial for the millions of students who can't wait for the economy to improve. They only get one chance to have a high-quality and equal education. But California also needs to ABOVE: Deanna Herrin, a Student CTA member who just applied for public assistance, with her children. November 2011 / www.cta.org 19