1. “Poverty is NOT a Learning Disability” or How Exemplary Teachers Educate Children of Poverty, Having Low School Readiness Skills, Without Referrals to Special Education by Lizette Y. Howard

2. Where did the focus derive?  We struggle so much with “the gap” and “poverty issues” that this HAS to be rocket science.  There is a specific staff development that leads teachers to success?  When I finish this research I will have the magic bullet!!

3. What I Knew  In 2007, 18 percent of America’s children who were under 17 were living below the poverty level. Up one percent from 2006.  Children living in families that receive welfare payments are much more likely than other children to be identified as having a learning disability (16 percent compared with 8 percent of other children in 2004).

4. The Problem  Since the 1976-1977 school year, when Congress first required public schools to document the number of children with LD, the share of school-age students identified as LD has risen from 1.8 percent to 5.2 percent.  The enrollment in public school has remained relatively stagnant from 1981 to present however learning disabilities now account for more than half of all students enrolled in special education programs, an increase of 22 percent over the past 25 years. In the past decade alone, the number of students ages 6 to 21 identified as LD under IDEA has increased to 38 percent. The largest increase, 44 percent, is among adolescents ages 12-17.

5. The Problem  Research shows that disability rates are rising among children living in poverty, while rates for children above the poverty line have remained steady. Many factors shape a child’s learning and development and can be categorized into social and biological factors. According to the research, living in poverty increases the exposure to these risk factors that compromise human development and often increase the need for special education services.

6. The Problem  Biological factors are factors that are associated with the nature of human beings and their biological makeup. Some of the biological factors that are cause for concern in children living in poverty include lead and other toxin exposure, prenatal exposure to alcohol/drugs, and malnourishment. Most research has focused more on the factors that can influence child development, especially for children living in poverty. For example, most children who live below the poverty line experience factors such as parental stress and poor child care settings early on in life. Limited access to books, poor quality childcare, and less interaction time between children and their primary caregivers are also contributors. These factors have a tremendous impact on children’s school readiness and achievement.

7. The Problem  According to the National Research Council, the most influential factor of successful child development is the relationships developed between the child and their primary caregiver. These relationships are often — though not always — strained when the family is living in poverty. Research shows that families living in poverty tend to engage in less verbal discussion, which can limit a child’s vocabulary development. The amount of literacy tasks or exposure to books also tends be lower in these situations. Additionally, disciplinary principles and influential parenting approaches also tend to be lower among families living in poverty.

8. What I Didn’t Know  Are these children REALLY learning disabled?  Is there something we are missing?  How do some teachers overcome the effects of poverty in the classroom?

9. What I Thought  The more staff development you received about teaching the better teacher you would be  The more experienced teachers would know more about differentiating  Teachers with children connect better with children  Teachers with poverty backgrounds have a deeper understanding about poverty issues.  Now, reality

10. Significance  The average expenditure for a special education student for learning disability services adds $4,071 to the general education yearly student average of $2,418, bringing the cost to $6,439 (Sack, 2004). This makes educating a special education student 2.6 times more costly than a student in general education.

11. Significance  Relying on Special Education may prevent educators from truly understanding the issue of low socio- economics and readiness.  Dollars spent for misdiagnosed learning disabilities pulls much needed dollars away from General Education AND Special Education

12. Purpose of Study  Through the research I conducted, I sought to improve the identification of elementary school children with low- school readiness skills to enable support measures and differentiation before major labeling or identification occurs.  Insure that education dollars are directed with greater efficiency.

13. Goal The goal of this study design was to identify: 1.An instructional environment that restricts learning disabilities identification to students who are truly learning disabled 2.Teaching strategies that enable low achieving students to compete successfully in a regular classroom.

14. The Plan  Find teachers who do it right according to referral and retention numbers  Listen to them a. One focus group interview b. Two audio taped interviews

15. The Plan  Watch them (two 45 minute in classroom video tapings)  Find the common secret!!!!

16. What doesn’t mean success  Poverty background  Age of teacher  Gender of teacher  Years of teaching  Academic education  History of academic staff development

17. What seems to mean success for kids  On-going assessments. NO, not just tests!!!  Swift Intervention  The BIG AHA????

18. RELATIONSHIPS!!  Relationships with colleagues  Relationships with parents  Relationships with kids!!  Responsibility for learning, not teaching

19. Implications  Learn how to hire teachers who are humanistic AND highly qualified.  Provide staff development that provides an understanding on relationship building, culture differences and asset based teaching.  Encourage universities and teaching colleges to offer more classes on diversity, effects of poverty on readiness, and hands on intern experiences with low income populations.  Insist that teachers form home to school communications.

20. RELATIONSHIPS LEARN HOW TO MAKE THEM AND LEARN HOW TO KEEP THEM