Who Are the Most Disadvantaged? Factors Associated with the Achievement of Students with Low Socio- Economic Backgrounds

The achievement gap between distinct groups of students has increasingly been an important subject of focus in the contemporary educational literature, governments' educational policies (irrespective of their development level), and the endeavors of international organizations (such as UNESCO and Word Bank), since education is proven to be a substantial strategy to reduce poverty and enhance individuals' and communities' overall living condition (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Fullan, 2006). A major body of educational policy research examined the achievement gap and found it to be substantial among those who were labeled as low socio-economic status (SES) and minority students (Crane, 1996; Desimone & Long, 2010; Delen & Bellibas, 2015; Flores, 2007; Haycock, 2001; Kober, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 2006; Lubienski, 2002). It is consistently found that unlike students with higher socio economic status SES backgrounds, students who suffer from lower SES living conditions are less likely to succeed in elementary and secondary schools and to attend a higher education institution (Daniel, 2009; Gelbal, 2008; Perry & McConney, 2010; Undheim & Nordvik, 1992). The issue is especially critical for successful low SES students. Wyner, Bridgeland, and Dilulio (2007), for instance, reported that high achieving low income students are more likely to fail during their primary and secondary education, and less likely to graduate from college when compared with their high-SES counterparts.Many potential remedies to the problem are discussed in the literature. Some proposed solutions have put considerable pressure on schools. In many studies and articles, the school is considered a useful intervention in addressing the disadvantages associated with low SES backgrounds (e.g., Darling-Hammond, 2000; Haycock, 1998; Ingersoll, 2001; Jesse, Davis, & Pokorny, 2004; Koedel, 2009; Mosteller, 1995; Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2005; Sanders & Horn, 1998). Educational researchers found that the variation of achievement among students is larger between different schools than the variation within each individual school. This finding reveals the significant contribution of the teacher to student learning outcomes. Further research concluded that the teacher has a greater influence on student learning than any other school-related factors and that good quality teaching matters (Hanushek & Kain, 2005), particularly for students from disadvantaged backgrounds (Haycock, 2001; Koedel, 2009; Sanders & Horn, 1998). "Ensuring an adequate supply of well-qualified teachers in high-minority schools" is considered to be an effective way to deal with the achievement problem of low-SES students (Kober, 2001). Even though such research emphasizes the importance of effective teachers, measuring teacher effectiveness has been the subject of controversy, and not much has been done to assign teachers who are considered effective to schools with high concentrations of low-SES students. Yet, some other school policies, such as reducing class size, have been implemented and resulted in substantial academic gains for low-SES students (Mosteller, 1995). Besides remedies aimed at improving students' education in schools, researchers have proposed various other policies and strategies for intervention programs to alleviate the detrimental impact of SES on the academic achievement of lower SES students. The list of solutions they produced mostly suggested the importance of early childhood education, parenting, and household issues (Bellibas & Gumus, 2013; Darling-Hammond, 2010; Ingram, Wolfe, & Lieberman, 2007; Lareau, 1987, 2002, 2003; Rothstein, 2004; Scott- Jones, 1987). For instance, Darling-Hammond (2010) reports 2006 PISA results and argues that the U.S has the largest existing achievement gap among students with differing SES, when compared to other developed countries. In addition to assigning high quality teachers to vulnerable environments, Darling-Hammond highlights the importance of the provision of basic life needs for low-income students, as well as the creation of supportive early learning environments. …