The stereotypes of people living in poverty in America are so deeply imbedded in our society that one
of the most difficult parts of this training may be to examine your beliefs and open your mind to new
interpretations of the behavior of those struggling without basic needs. Doing so, however, is the first
step to improving your success and effectiveness with educating students in poverty and helping end
the cycle of suffering. Your attitudes and beliefs shapes your tone of voice, your body posture, your
facial expressions and your actions towards students.
“It really undermines [college students’] ability to do well in school. Their grades suffer, their test scores appear to be lower, and overall, their chances of graduating are slimmer. They can barely escape their conditions of poverty long enough to complete their degrees.” Food insecurity and housing instability among college students are systemic problems that are rooted in structural causes. The good news is, this can be solved.
Education and Deficit, Grit, and Structural Ideologies
A Call to Unhook from Deficit and Grit Ideology and to Strive for Structural Ideology in Teacher Education
Paul Gorski explores the educational equity implications of three popular ideological positions that drive teachers’ and teacher educators’ understandings of, and responses to, poverty and economic injustice in schools: deficit ideology, grit ideology, and structural ideology.
"Poverty has a significantly negative effect on one's sense of control over the environment. . . . It's a lack of resources that produces a lack of resilience, not the other way around. . . The biggest predictor of resilience has nothing to do with relationships or attitudes, but everything to do with access to services."