Daily experiences and adjustment of gifted low-income urban children at home and school.

Bronfenbrenner (1989) identifies childrens' daily activities and personal relationships as developmental opportunities that depend, to a large extent, on the settings in which children live. Likewise, educators concerned with the special needs of gifted children recognize that an enriched environment plays a critical role in fostering talent (Benbow & Arjmand, 1990; Cohn & Stanley, 1979), and highlight the importance of social institutions in providing sufficiently fertile ground for growth (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993). For example, families often nurture giftedness by investing in resources, offering emotional support, and structuring childrens' time (Bland, Sowa, & Callahan, 1994; Bloom, 1985; Csikszentmihalyi et al., 1993). Skilled or knowledgeable adults at school, or in the community, also may provide support or formal mentoring important to furthering children's talent (Feldman, 1986).

The cases presented here document the activities, resources, and relationships available to three gifted urban elementary-public-school children living in poverty and describe their adjustment at home and at school over a three year period. Predicting the amount of social capital the children would have available was difficult. On the one hand, given the paucity of resources in urban school systems (Kozol, 1992) and the vicissitudes of urban poverty (Wilson, 1987), adults responsible for these children were likely to have many more salient demands than the gifted child's needs. On the other hand, their parents or teachers may have found ways to circumvent economic hardship to provide resources for them (Clark, 1983; Furstenberg, 1993). There was also the possibility that the children would manage to shape their own environment either by pulling for their needs or by distancing themselves psychologically (Ford, 1994).

The three children, participants in a longitudinal study of 216 low-income urban children from the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS), were identified for inclusion in these case studies because they were the only children in the sample who both scored above the 95th percentile on total reading or total math on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and qualified for free lunch based on their family income. Extensive information about the children was collected from multiple sources. Each year, mothers completed a telephone interview and a packet that was mailed to them. Mothers provided information on family demographics, children's adjustment, after school arrangements, parenting practices, home-school relations, and stressors. Structured telephone interviews were conducted with each child in the evening three times during 3rd grade and five times during both 4th and 5th grades to determine their activities for each 15 minute period following school dismissal that day. Mean reliability of children's reports with random after school spot-checks was .78. In addition, children completed measures at school twice per year providing information about their relationships, interests, self-appraised competence, family activities, social support, neighborhood safety, and psychological adjustment. Descriptive data on the neighborhoods in which children lived were obtained from the Census Bureau, the Milwaukee Police Department, and an observation of each child's neighborhood during the afternoon. Information obtained from the schools included children's grades, teacher ratings of each child and home-school relations, and statistics on each school. Research staff also was familiar with the teachers and the schools. Procedures and instruments are described in detail elsewhere (Posner, 1997; Posner & Vandell, 1994; Shumow, Vandell, & Kang, 1996; Vandell, Shumow, & Posnet, in press).

Cases

Jason (Pseudonyms are used to protect confidentiality.)

Jason, gifted in both mathematics and reading, participated in the regular program at his neighborhood school where few children had high academic achievement. Despite his demonstrated ability to learn, high teacher ratings on persistence, and high academic self-efficacy, Jason received no academic enrichment or adaptations of any kind at school (talent development was not offered). This may explain his lukewarm attitude toward school work and his below ability (B -) grades. Jason felt supported emotionally at school, perhaps because the climate at the school he attended was the most positive of the 43 schools we visited. The calm, pleasant, orderly atmosphere of the school belied the fact that most students lived in extreme poverty, the expenditure per child was only $3,340, and industrial blight surrounded the school. The building was old, but it was clean and well maintained. Hallways were brightened by inspirational messages and children's creative work. Many parents responded to the positive climate--several parents of children in the broader study filed appeals so children could continue attending after moving from the neighborhood, most parents attended parent teacher conferences, and some volunteered at school.

Unfortunately, the positive climate did not extend to the relationship between his mother (Mrs. Thom) and his 5th grade teacher (Mrs. Dixon). Mrs. Thom rated the school as above average, but felt that Mrs. Dixon was only an average teacher. Further, although she regularly monitored his school work and discussed his school day with him daily, Mrs. Thom felt that Mrs. Dixon did not accept her as a partner, foster her involvement, care if Jason did well, or give her any credit. Mrs. Dixon agreed that Mrs. Thom supported and contributed to Jason's academic success, but she did not feel comfortable talking to her.

Despite limited financial and educational resources, Jason's mother and stepfather provided a supportive and stable, albeit limited, environment for his development. The family resided in an apartment building bordered by a major thoroughfare and Milwaukee's industrial valley (heavy industry) and located in an extremely poor area of Milwaukee's near south-side (M area annual family income = $8,309). Jason's mother, as a high school graduate, was relatively better educated than the neighbors (median adult education = 10.2 grades). Jason was disciplined firmly and rationally, felt he could depend on his family for support, and talked to them about issues that were important to him. The family did errands, projects, and attended church together on a weekly basis, and they often watched television together. Jason and his mother knew and interacted frequently with their neighbors which may explain why neither of them feared for his safety despite the fact that an average of 72 violent crimes was recorded in the neighborhood annually.

Each year, his mother told us that she wished Jason could attend a program with planned activities after school. During 3rd grade, Jason came home from school and waited an hour alone for his mother to return from her job as caretaker of an apartment building. His stepfather generally did not return home from his job as a retail clerk until after dinner. During 4th and 5th grades, Jason's mother arranged to be home after school twice a week. Her mother was with Jason and his younger sister the other days. The majority of Jason's time after-school was spent watching cartoons or sitcoms on television. Jason said he liked to read, but he did not read after school on the days he was interviewed, and did less homework than the average child (Posner, 1997). Because the library was not within walking distance, his grandmother or his mother drove him there to check out books about once a week. Despite enthusiasm for science, music, and art, he attended no lessons in these areas. He was a boy scout throughout the study and sang in the church choir during 5th grade.

April

April is gifted in mathematics and performed consistently well academically. She appraised her academic competence positively, and her excellent grades in music and art mirrored her interest in these subject. Her emotional adjustment, however, declined steadily. By the time she was in 5th grade, she was depressed (clinical depression limits) and her global self-esteem had plummeted. April attended the same school as Jason, but was placed in a different classroom. Her reports of frequent boredom and negative attitude toward school work may have been because no enrichment or special instruction was provided for her at school. Nevertheless, she worried about school constantly. Her comparatively poor athletic skills, low physical self-confidence, and high academic performance combined to make her feel like an outsider with her peers. Like Jason, she felt supported by the teachers, but Mr. Spooner (her 5th grade teacher) seemed unaware of her unhappiness. He rated April as a model child--well-behaved, highly motivated, and cooperative. April liked Mr. Spooner and her mother thought he was outstanding. He thought highly of Ms. Owen, too, rating her as a knowledgeable, involved, and supportive mother.

April saw her mother as more warm than controlling which agreed with Ms. Owen's self-report of her parenting. Nevertheless, April reported fighting with her mother frequently. Perhaps the stress of their daily situation contributed to this discord, since Ms. Owen rated the neighborhood, work, friends, and her own mental health as significant stressors. Ms. Owen knew April had problems with mood swings, withdrawal, and fits of anger. However, she apparently did not recognize these as signs of depression because she said that April was never depressed. The family (mother, brothers, & April) lived in a duplex about ten minutes walk from school. Like the majority of adults in the surrounding neighborhood, April's father, whom she saw occasionally, was a high school drop out. Her mother, with some nursing school post high school, was far more educated than the neighbors and was socially isolated from them. April talked to a neighbor about once a week, but she never visited or played with neighborhood children. She was not afraid of neighborhood children, but shared concerns about gangs, violence, and adults in the area with her mother.

Despite expressing a dislike for schoolwork, April spent more time doing homework after school during 5th grade than in any other single activity. She was not involved in any extracurricular activities during the course of the study, but her interest in reading and art was informally facilitated by weekly family library trips and by mother-daughter artistic projects. Unfortunately, the considerable amount of time April spent watching television was rarely devoted to programming that paralleled her talents or enhanced her education. On the days she was interviewed, she watched programs like Roseanne or the Cosby Show.

Katie

Katie Riley, who is gifted in reading, began attending a choice public school for the academically talented outside of her neighborhood during 3rd grade because the parochial school she had been attending dropped their gifted programming. Katie's MPS school had the only one gifted program openings when her mother applied. Katie liked school very much, but Mrs. Riley was quite disappointed with Katie's experience during 5th grade. She noted ...not the best situation. She has had a series of substitute and student teachers. The assistant principal finally took over. The assistant vice-principal, Mrs. Klug, (Katie's teacher) had the highest regard for Mrs. Riley. Mrs. Klug reported that she enjoyed an excellent relationship with Mrs. Riley whom she rated as knowledgeable about and proactively involved in Katie's education. Mrs. Riley did report being involved positively in furthering Katie's education. However, although she trusted that Mrs. Klug was a competent teacher with high academic standards, in contrast to Mrs. Klug, she rated their relationship as strained. She said that Mrs. Klug was disrespectful to her, did not keep her sufficiently informed, and did not give her positive reports about Katie. Interestingly, Mrs. Klug reported that she often gave her positive reports about Katie. Despite home-school differences, Katie felt supported by her teachers.

Katie was well-adjusted across contexts. Her favorite subjects were reading and science, and she received very high grades in all subjects. She read for fun more than other study participants although she spent more time watching network television than reading. The teacher rated her as well-behaved, happy, well liked, and motivated to learn. Likewise, Katie saw herself as a good friend, a successful student, and a happy person. Of the three children, Katie lived in the best neighborhood. Katie knew the neighbors and felt secure there. Her mother, however, had some safety worries. Most adults in her relatively nonviolent, racially integrated, hip neighborhood had attended college and earned lower middle class salaries. Katie's family fell below the poverty line because of lifestyle choices made by her college-educated parents. Her mother wanted to be a full-time mother, so the family of eight was supported solely by her father's modest income as a graphic designer. The family was emotionally and physically close--making things, shopping, playing, and attending church together. They also visited the public library and museums. Katie perceived her mother as very accepting and always willing to listen to my ideas. Despite severe financial stress, Katie's parents arranged for her to take the gymnastics lessons that she loved.

Conclusions and Implications

The experiences of these three children highlight several important points about the education of gifted children living in poverty. Not surprisingly, given the extensive literature on parents' role in children's academic achievement, several important contributions were made by the families. In contrast to many other children in the sample, each of these children remained in the same residence throughout the study. Given the negative consequences associated with residential mobility (Simmons, Burgeson, Carlton Ford, & Blyth, 1987), this stability may have been an important advantage for them. In addition, each of the mothers was proactively involved in the child's education. Mirroring other studies of resilient children living in poverty (Clark, 1983; Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995), they were knowledgeable about academic progress, checked on homework, talked about school, and took their children to the public library regularly. Moreover, this academic orientation was coupled with responsive approaches to parenting in each family. For example, the children felt that their mothers listened to them, cared about them, and considered their perspectives, a view consistent with their mothers' accounts of their child-rearing patterns. Each of the children also went places or made things with their parents. Future research needs to address how parents of successful impoverished children guide and teach their children during these periods together.

Nevertheless, although these parents negotiated the challenges of poverty effectively enough to secure fundamental needs and monitor schooling, we see that the children experienced limited academic opportunities. Two of them received no enrichment of any kind at school, and, not surprisingly, had negative attitudes toward academics. Katie, who attended a gifted program, was the only child who liked school. Even so, her mother was dissatisfied. It should be stressed that parents must actively pursue these special programs and many applicants are rejected for lack of space regardless of need or merit. After school, the children watched a great deal of low-quality television. The more advantaged gifted teen-agers in Csikszentmihalyi's study (1993) also watched television frequently which the researchers attributed to a need for down time from the intensive talent development they were engaged in after school. The children in the present study did not spend time in such talent development, so their television watching may have been due to boredom.

These case underscores the needs of gifted urban children living in poverty. Other case studies conducted by Furstenberg (1993) illustrate the potential benefits for children when they were able to attend extracurricular programs outside of their impoverished neighborhoods. Research (e.g. Damiani, 1996; Ukeje, Feiring, & Lewis, 1997) demonstrates the promise of identification initiatives, enrichment programs, and parent workshops for increasing the motivation and cognitive skills of inner-city gifted children. Like all gifted children, impoverished gifted children need the opportunity to engage in talent development during and after school. Because of severely strained financial situations of their families and communities, their access to opportunity is likely to depend to a great extent on the efforts of policy makers and professionals to identify them, develop accessible programs, and communicate sufficient information to their parents.

Table 1
Percentage of time children spent in various activities after school

                                        Jason             April
                                        Grade             Grade

Activities                          3     4     5     3     4     5
Extra-Curricular                    0     4     4     0     0     0
Homework                            6     0    13     0    15    24
Reading                             0     0     0     0     4     5
Television                         33    38    58    24     7    20
Chores                              0     0     2     9    14     9
Socializing                         3     2     2     3     7    12
Pick-up sports                      9    13     0     0     0     0
Outside Unstructured                0     0     0    12    11     0
Inside Activities                  27    24     2    12    12     5
Maintenance                        12     7     2    15    13    11
Transit                             9    11    13    15    13     9
Other, includes unoccupied          0     2     7     9     4     7

                                        Katie
                                        Grade
Activities                          3     4     5
Extra-Curricular                    2     6     8
Homework                           12     2     5
Reading                             9    15     8
Television                         21     9    15
Chores                              0     3     2
Socializing                         2    12     5
Pick-up sports                      0     0     0
Outside Unstructured                0     0     9
Inside Activities                  15    23    12
Maintenance                        17    15     9
Transit                            19     9    23
Other, includes unoccupied          5     5     5

Note. Percentages may not total to exactly 100% because of rounding.

REFERENCES

Benbow, C., & Arjmand, O. (1990). Predictors of high academic achievement in mathematics and science by mathematically talented students: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 430441.

Bland, L., Sowa, C., & Callahan, C. (1994). An overview of resilience in gifted children. Roeper Review, 17, 77-80.

Bloom, B. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta Six theories of child development Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Clark, R. (1983). Family life and school achievement Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cohn, G., & Stanley, J. C. (1979). Educating the gifted: Acceleration and enrichment. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Damiani, V. (1996). The individual family support plan: A tool to assist special populations of gifted learners. Roeper Review, 18, 293-97.

Feldman, D. H. (1986). Nature's gambit. New York: Basic.

Ford, D. (1994). Nurturing resilience in gifted Black youth. Roeper Review, 17, 80-85.

Furstenberg, F. (1993). How families manage risk and opportunity in dangerous neighborhoods. In W. J. Wilson (Ed.), Sociology and the public agenda (pp. 231-258). Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Furstenberg, F., & Hughes, M (1995). Social capital and successful development among at-risk youth. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 580-592.

Kozol, J. (1992). Savage Inequalities. New York: Crown.

Posner, J. (1997, April). Variations in low-income children's use of time after school. Paper presented the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development. Washington D. C.

Posner, J., & Vandell, D. (1994). Low-income children's after school care: Are there beneficial effects of after school programs? Child Development, 65, 440-456.

Shumow, L., Vandell, D. L., & Kang, K. S. (1996). School choice, family characteristics, and home-school relations: Contributors to achievement? Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 451-460.

Simmons, R., Burgeson, R., Carlton-Ford, S., & Blyth, D. (1987). The impact of cumulative change in early adolescence. Child Development, 58, 1220-1234.

Ukeje, I., Feiring, C., & Lewis, M. (1997, April). Early intervention in Newark, NJ's inner city gifted program. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development. Washington D.C.

Vandell, D. L., Shumow, L. Posner, J. (in press). Children's after school programs: Promoting resilience or vulnerability? In H. McCubbin (Ed.) Promoting resilience in children and families at risk. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wilson, W. J.(1987). The truly disadvantaged Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lee Shumow is a Developmental Psychologist and an Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology at Northwestern Illinois University.

Manuscript submitted January, 1997. Revision accepted June, 1997.