Environmental Influences on Urban Adolescent Academic Achievement
The academic achievement of American youth is characterized by striking disparities. In particular, research shows that African American youth, at all education levels, do not perform or achieve to the same degree as their White counterparts (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004). Similarly, Native American and Hispanic students are identified as having the lowest and least stable educational aspirations (Wahl & Blackhurst, 2000). In order to properly comprehend the educational disparities facing American youth, one must: understand the changing demographics of the United States and the implications of such changes, become aware of environmental conditions, and examine the influence of environmental factors on academic achievement.
Demographic Shift
The population of the United States has undergone dramatic changes. More specifically, the population is becoming larger, older, and more diverse (Shrestha & Heisler, 2011). The increased diversity of the American population necessitates an understanding of the unique characteristics and needs of diverse individuals. Of particular importance is the ethnic changes occurring in the United States. According to the United States Census Bureau (2010), between the year 2000 and 2010, the White population increased only 5.7% while all other groups increased at a much higher rate (e.g. the African American population increased 12.3%, Asians saw a 43.3% population increase, the Hispanic population increased 43%, and the population of individuals who identify as having two or more races increased 32%). In short, ethnic minority populations in the United States have undergone dramatic increases. These rates of increase support the projection that the aggregate ethnic minority population will become the majority by the year 2042—as predicted by a 2008 National Population Projections press release (Vincent & Velkoff, 2010).
The reality that ethnic minority populations are increasing is undeniable. Therefore, in order to foster a more inclusive and culturally competent future it is imperative to acknowledge the unique experiences of ethnic minorities. In particular, research indicates that ethnic minorities have disproportionately higher rates of disability (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011; Smart & Smart, 1997; Wilson & Senices, 2005; Hanson & Kerkhoff, 2007). Additionally, ethnic minorities tend to: live in poverty, be employed in more dangerous jobs, lack health insurance, and have lower educational attainment (Smart & Smart, 1997; Wilson & Senices, 2005; Hanson & Kerkhoff, 2007; Reed, Holloway, Leung & Menz, 2005). Further substantiating research surrounding ethnic minority populations, Mello and Swanson (2007) cite that 32% of African American youth live in poverty and 6% of African Americans aged 25 years and older are unemployed.
Moreover, African Americans are more likely to reside in low-quality and impoverished neighborhoods (Mello & Swanson, 2007; Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004). Low-quality neighborhoods are typically ones that offer few educational and occupational opportunities and have high concentrations of unemployed adults (Mello & Swanson, 2007; Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004). Further decreasing the quality of neighborhoods are the higher rates of youth exposure to community violence found low-income, urban, and predominantly minority communities (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004; Gudino, Nadeem, Kataoka, & Lau, 2012; Stein, Jaycox, Kataoka, Rhodes, & Vestal, 2003). Research indicates that youth living in urban areas are more often caught in gun crossfire, more likely to be robbed, and have higher reports of being shot or stabbed (Stein, Jaycox, Kataoka, Rhodes, & Vestal, 2003).
The diversification of the American population underscores larger societal issues. In particular, as has been previous stated: ethnic minorities more often live in low-income urban environments, are more frequently exposed to community violence, have lower educational attainment, have limited exposure to employed adults, are at an increased risk of acquiring disabilities, do not have access to health insurance, and live in communities that offer few educational and occupational resources. Naturally, the presence of these facts is alarming considering that the United States’ projected total population is of an ethnic minority majority. Therefore, it can be argued that there is an increased need for a more comprehensive understanding of factors influencing the aspirations of ethnic minority adolescents. As cited by Wahl and Blackhurst (2000), “the nation’s economic future depends on higher levels of educational attainment within those segments of society currently possessing the lowest levels of education” (p. 367). Current research identifies that one such segment of society is that of adolescents living in urban environments.
Environmental Conditions
For the purposes of this paper, one’s environment can be conceptualized as the neighborhood in which one resides. According to Mello and Swanson (2007), neighborhoods are simply geographic spaces. The primary definition of neighborhood quality incorporates average adult income, education, and occupation (Mello & Swanson, 2007). The quality of one’s geographic space has been suggested to influence the future outcomes of the children who grow up within these environments (Winter, 2002). According to Crowder and South (2003), the socioeconomic status of a neighborhood impacts adolescent outcomes by “shaping the normative environment, the quality of institutions, and the opportunity structures to which they are exposed” (p. 692). Urban environments tend to be primarily populated by racial minorities and are more often categorized as low quality due to the rapid deterioration of neighborhoods and higher concentrations of the nation’s poorest members within urban neighborhoods (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004).
In addition to the concentration of the nation’s poorest members, urban neighborhoods experience higher incidences of community violence. Youth exposure to community violence is found more often in low-income, urban, and predominantly minority neighborhoods (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004; Gudino, Nadeem, Kataoka, & Lau, 2012; Stein, Jaycox, Kataoka, Rhodes, & Vestal, 2003). Estimations indicate that between 50 and 96% of urban youth report witnessing some form of community violence (Gudina, Nadeem, Kataoka, & Lau, 2012). Exposure to community violence has been found to have profound negative impacts on youth. In particular, exposure to community violence in childhood has been said to relate to criminal, physical, as well as mental health complications both during adolescence and in adulthood (Milam, Furr-Holden, & Leaf, 2010). Additional associated implications include: depression, anxiety, aggression (Gudino, Nadeem, Kataoka, & Lau, 2012; Stein, Jaycox, Kataoka, Rhodes, & Vestal, 2003), impaired school functioning (e.g. decreased reading ability and decreased rates of high school graduation), decreased intelligence quotient scores (Stein, Jaycox, Kataoka, Rhodes, & Vestal, 2003), conduct disorder (Gudino, Nadeem, Kataoka, & Lau, 2012; Stein, Jaycox, Kataoka, Rhodes, & Vestal, 2003), and substance use (Gudino, Nadeem, Kataoka, & Lau, 2012).
According to Mello and Swanson (2007), the perceptions adolescents possess regarding the quality of his or her neighborhood is predictive of mental health outcomes. Feelings of hopelessness and fatalism pervade in low socioeconomic neighborhoods as a result of the mirrored feelings and experiences surrounding economic difficulties observed in oneself and in neighbors (Crowder & South, 2003). Consequently, as a result of urban youth’s preoccupation with maintaining safety (Miliam, Furr-Holden, & Leaf, 2010) as well as economic concerns their focus on academics are compromised. The implications of such relationship are profound when considering the positive association between socioeconomic levels in comparison to educational and occupational expectations (Mello & Swanson, 2007).
Environmental Interaction with Academic Outcomes
Research indicates that neighborhood quality “plays a meaningful role in determining academic outcomes” (Crowder & South, 2003, p. 660). The inherently stressful nature of academic transitions (e.g. from middle school to high school) are said to be more difficult for adolescents living in urban neighborhoods due to the already stressful conditions faced in their environments (Long, Monoi, Harper, Knoblauch & Murphy, 2007). When compared to other communities, urban areas experienced a greater relationship between the influence of neighborhood quality and adolescent dropout rates (Ceballo, McLoyd & Toyokawa, 2004). Research indicates that adolescents’ expectations (both educational and occupational) for the future were positively associated with perceptions of neighborhood quality (Wahl & Blackhurst, 2000; Mello & Swanson, 2007). Ceballo, McLoyd, and Toyokawa (2004) reference a number of studies when explaining a similar relationship between neighborhood quality and educational performance/school completion. Similarly, Crowder and South (2003) identify that lower test scores and grade point averages, reduced cognitive abilities, higher risks for dropping out, lower attendance in post-secondary education, and overall fewer completed years of schooling were observed in urban adolescents living in high levels of poverty. The interaction between low quality neighborhoods and academic outcomes has been understood through a number of sociological theories—collective socialization, social capital, and social control. These theories help understand the interaction between neighborhood quality and academic outcomes.
Collective Socialization
One of the most widely referenced theories is the collective socialization theory. As referenced by Crowder and South (2003), collective socialization posits that interactions with non-parental adults within one’s neighborhood shape adolescent values, norms, aspirations, and behaviors. Due to the concentration of poverty in urban areas, individuals living in these areas have decreased access to positive non-parental adults or role models (Winter, 2002; Mello & Swanson, 2007). Having more middle-class neighbors has been suggested to encourage adolescents to view education as more important and useful—ultimately leading to greater academic effort (Ceballo, McLoyd, and Toyokawa, 2004). Researchers suggest that higher-status neighbors contribute to the establishment of academic success as normative and institutionally supported (Crowder & South, 2003). Likewise, a shortage of role models and socialization agents is observed in neighborhoods with fewer affluent adults (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004).
In alignment with collective socialization theory, Crowder and South (2003) identify that adolescents are less likely to complete school and gain employment when many neighbors experience school failure, joblessness, and poverty. This may be due to the fact that children identify with the adult workers in their life, occupational aspirations of children are strongly associated with parental occupations, and children with exposure to unemployed adults have less developed career fantasies (Wahl & Blackhurst, 2000). Neighborhoods with more affluent neighbors have been said to stimulate skills that encourage behaviors of academic achievement (Crowder & South, 2003). Additionally benefits of having affluent neighbors include: higher valuing of education in African American adolescents (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004); higher expectations expressed by parents and non-parental adults (Winter, 2002); and increased opportunities for relationships with well-functioning peers (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004). In essence, the collective socialization theory states that through socialization, adolescents’ future expectations may be associated with the positive association between neighborhood socioeconomic status and academic outcomes (Mello & Swanson, 2007).
Social Capital
Social capital is described as the connections between individuals that can be inherently found in family and community relations that are beneficial to cognitive and social development (Crowder & South, 2003). In urban environments, adolescents are not only provided limited (if any) access to economically successful role models but also face obstacles in accessing social capital. Winter (2002) states that the lack of positive role models translates into fewer connections with adults who can access resources beyond the community. Furthermore, resources such as adequate community libraries, recreational centers, and school materials are found to be lacking in economically depressed areas (such as many urban environments in which high numbers of ethnic minorities reside) (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004). As a result, the direct and indirect influences related to valuing education is lost (Ceballo, McLoyd, & Toyokawa, 2004). In essence the social capital theory mirrors as statement by Crowder and South (2003), “academic success is largely a function of the degree to which an adolescent is able to maintain ties to local institutions” (p. 662).
Social Control
The premise behind social control theory surrounds the level of supervision in neighborhoods. In particular, it is proposed that adolescents living in low socioeconomic neighborhoods have less supervision that more affluent neighborhoods and, as a result, are at greater risk of school failure (Crowder & South, 2003). Mello and Swanson (2007) highlight that collective socialization is maintained through neighborhood supervision, monitoring, and role modeling. Substantiating this claim, research indicates that despite living in a low-income home, adolescents who have contact with economically successful non-parental adults learn that educational success is possible (Crowder & South, 2003).
In short, these three theories propose that urban areas provide: decreased numbers of role models who are economically successful, ineffective sources of social capital, as well as weakened social institutions (Crowder & South, 2003). Naturally, the result is a population of adolescents at a severe disadvantage educationally. One could argue that lower academic achievement in ethnic minority youth living in low socioeconomic urban areas has less to do with the characteristics of these individuals and more to do with the societal obstacles disproportionately present in the areas in which these individuals live. When environmental conditions (such as socioeconomic factors and exposure to violence) are considered, research indicates that academic performance suffers. Beyond seeing this connection, one must recognize that living in such environments is not only met by limited access to resources but shifts an individual’s level of investments. More specifically, Winter (2002) cites that living in violent neighborhoods “makes daily survival much of the focus of day-to-day life” (p. 12). As a result, these adolescents do not invest in long-term commitments—such as preparing for college or other educational milestones—(Winter, 2002) and as a result have poorer academic performance and outcomes.