Increasing the Complexity of Young Adolescents’ Beliefs About Poverty and Inequality: Results of an 8th Grade Social Studies Curriculum Intervention

Abstract

Poverty and economic hardship remain a reality for many of America's children. Although the causes of poverty are varied, Americans strongly endorse individual responsibility as a primary cause. Because beliefs about poverty originate in childhood and adolescence, intervention efforts targeting young people may be particularly effective in shifting attitudes about the poor and policies designed to help the disadvantaged. To test this proposition, the current study evaluated the efficacy of a 1-week 8th grade social studies curriculum focusing on poverty and inequality. Study participants were upper middle-class youth enrolled in multiple sections of a Social Studies course taught by a single teacher. Participants had little direct contact with marginalized groups such as poor and homeless individuals in their communities. Students (N=66) completed a survey assessing their attitudes and beliefs about poverty and poor people prior to, and 1 week and 6 months post-instruction. Results indicated that the curriculum was partially effective in increasing the complexity of students' beliefs about poverty. Students were more likely to emphasize fatalistic causes and less likely to list individualistic causes for poverty following instruction than before, but rarely emphasized structural causes for poverty and rated individual effort as the most influential factor in determining one's success. Implications of the study findings for curriculum efforts targeting young adolescents' reasoning about economic inequality and inequity and directions for future studies are discussed.

Children's perceptions of social resource inequality

“…Children’s open-ended explanations were coded for analyses into one of three conceptual categories expected based on previous research (Chafel & Neitzel, 2005; Flanagan et al, 2014; Killen et al, 2016; Mistry et al, 2012). These included: 1) Preferential Treatment , 2) Differing Financial Resources , and 3) Differing Needs .…”

“…For example, with few exceptions (Chafel & Neitzel, 2005; Hussak & Cimpian, 2015), studies have shown that children do not spontaneously consider how social factors (e.g., insufficient educational or job opportunities) contribute to differences in individuals’ economic status until 12–18 years of age (Arsenio, Preziosi, Silberstein, & Hamburger, 2013; Flanagan et al, 2014; Goodman et al, 2000; Mistry, Brown, Chow, & Collins, 2012). Younger children have also been shown to perceive certain group-based resource inequalities to be deserved, and to assume that the way things are is the way that they are supposed to be (McGillicuddy-De Lisi, Daly, & Neal, 2006; Olson, Dweck, Spelke, & Banaji, 2011).…”

“…Based on previous research, we expected that 10–11 year-olds’ spontaneous self-generated explanations for the inequality would include references to preferential treatment of one social group over the other (Killen et al, 2016, 2002), to money or the economic resources of the institutions (Chafel & Neitzel, 2005; Mistry et al, 2012), and to the relative needs of the populations served (Schmidt, Svetlova, Johe, & Tomasello, 2016; Sigelman & Waitzman, 1991). We hypothesized that children would be more likely to explain resource inequality in terms of preferential treatment when institutions serving African-Americans were observed to be receiving fewer resources than institutions serving European-Americans (versus when European-Americans were observed to be at a disadvantage), based on related research indicating that, by middle childhood, children have an emerging recognition that discrimination is most often directed toward racial/ethnic minority, rather than majority, groups (Bigler et al, 2008; Brown et al, 2007; J.…”

“All These People Who Can Do Things That I Can’t”: Adolescents’ Reflections on Class, Poverty, and the American Dream

“…Most interesting in the findings is that more than 90% of respondents stated their belief that poverty is not fair. As children move into adolescence, however, there is evidence in the literature that there is a shift to using individualistic explanations over structural ones to explain the causes of inequality (Leahy, 1990;Mistry et al, 2012). Seider (2011) found a strong tendency among adolescents to legitimize inequality on the basis of individualistic explanations.…”

“…These findings indicate the importance of historical context and enduring values in framing how younger people construct their perceptions of socioeconomic status and the notion of the American Dream. LITERATURE REVIEW Mistry, Brown, Chow, and Collins (2012) found agreement in the literature that adults in the United States tend to cite individualistic reasons for social mobility more than structural ones. The American Dream, also referred to as achievement ideology, is the belief that those who persist in working hard can earn upward class mobility.…”