Week 8 Discussion - Elementary Curricula After Completion

Week 8 Discussion - Elementary Curricula After completing this week's R

After completing this week's readings, respond to the following questions. The Case Study in Curriculum Implementation (A Pilot Study of a Kindergarten Summer School Reading Program in High-Poverty Urban Schools) presents some excellent information about summer learning. This reading indicates that research on this topic has produced mixed results. As you read the section on the "Effects of Summer School Programs," (see attached) compare it with the article titled " Summer Reading Loss: What it is and what can we do about it? " (link).

Where do you find some contradictions about the effectiveness of summer school reading programs in the two articles? They both agree that middle-class students seem to benefit more from summer reading programs than their lower-SES peers. Did that surprise you? What might be the reason for this conclusion? How would you challenge teachers to "break out of that mold" to show better results for those students who are classified as low SES?

Do we always have to be satisfied with the idea that children in the low SES column will automatically not be able to perform? Why do you think that idea has become almost common practice? Link: Your initial responses are due by 11:55 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday and should be between words. The initial posting should be a statement of your point of view on the question, supported by the required readings.

Paper For Above instruction

The effectiveness of summer school reading programs has long been a subject of debate among educators and researchers, with some studies indicating limited benefits, especially for students from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds. The contrasting findings from the “Effects of Summer School Programs” and “Summer Reading Loss: What it is and what can we do about it?” exemplify this ongoing controversy. While both sources acknowledge that middle-class students tend to benefit more from summer reading initiatives, this discrepancy underscores fundamental issues related to educational equity and the structural factors influencing student learning outcomes.

The “Effects of Summer School Programs” review highlights mixed results regarding summer interventions’ success, with some studies reporting gains while others show minimal or no impact. A recurring theme in these reports is that children from higher-SES families tend to retain and even improve their reading skills during the summer, whereas low-SES students often experience regression. Conversely, the article “Summer Reading Loss” emphasizes that children from low-income backgrounds are particularly vulnerable to the “summer slide,” losing critical reading skills over the break due to limited access to books, enriching activities, and supportive literacy environments at home. This convergence of findings confirms that socioeconomic factors strongly influence summer learning gains or losses.

One contradiction lies in the perception of the effectiveness of summer programs; some research suggests that summer interventions might not be impactful enough to close the achievement gap, unless they are specifically tailored and resourced adequately. Moreover, while both articles agree that middle-class students benefit more, the reasons behind these differences can be nuanced. Higher-SES families often provide more extensive literacy experiences, access to books, and encouragement, which foster development independent of school-based programs. Lower-SES families may face barriers such as limited time, resources, or awareness, which hinder participation or the quality of engagement during summer.

It was not surprising to me that middle-class students outperform their low-SES peers in summer reading programs. Socioeconomic disparity encompasses access to resources, educational support, and cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1986). These inequities create an uneven playing field where children from affluent backgrounds accrue literacy skills consistently, whereas their low-income counterparts face multiple barriers. To challenge teachers and break out of the mold, educators should adopt culturally responsive and engaging strategies that connect with students’ lived experiences, providing equitable access to books and literacy activities beyond the school environment (Ladson-Billings, 1994). For instance, integrating community-based reading projects or family involvement initiatives can foster a more inclusive literacy culture that supports low-SES students effectively.

Furthermore, teachers need to shift from viewing low-SES children as inherently incapable to recognizing their potential and addressing contextual barriers. Implementing personalized reading interventions, increasing access to high-interest texts, and involving families can help reduce the gap. The idea that children from low-income backgrounds cannot perform is rooted in deficit thinking, which has historically been used to justify unequal educational opportunities (Valencia, 2010). This mindset has become almost automatic due to systemic inequalities and societal stereotypes that perpetuate the notion that low SES is an insurmountable hurdle, rather than a challenge that can be addressed through targeted support and policy change.

In conclusion, bridging the achievement gap in summer reading requires recognizing the influence of socioeconomic factors and adopting strategies that promote equity. Summer programs must be designed with intentionality, culturally relevant materials, and community engagement to truly benefit low-SES students. Challenging stereotypical beliefs about their capabilities is vital to fostering an inclusive education system that values and uplifts every learner’s potential.

References

• Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood.
• Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The Dreamkeepers: Successful Teachers of African American Children. Jossey-Bass.
• Valencia, R. R. (2010). Dismantling Contemporary Deficit Thinking: Educators and Culturally Responsive Practices. Routledge.
• Kim, J. S., & Pekrun, R. (2014). Academic motivation and achievement. In R. Ryan (Ed.), Handbook of Motivation at School (pp. 173–193). Routledge.
• Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Olson, L. S. (2007). Summer learning and its implications: Insights from the Philadelphia age cohort studies. Teachers College Record, 109(2), 244–272.
• Heyns, B. (1987). Summer setback: Race, poverty, and the rural/urban achievement gap. Phi Delta Kappan, 68(2), 137–140.
• McCombs, J. S., & Augustine, C. H. (2014). Summer Learning and the Effects of Summer Programs on Academic Achievement. RAND Corporation.
• Kuhfeld, M., Tarasawa, B., Johnson, A., & Levine, S. (2020). Learning during COVID-19: Initial findings on students’ reading and math achievement and growth. RAND Corporation.
• Credis, K., & Reynolds, A. (2021). Addressing Educational Disparities through Summer Learning Programs. Journal of Education Policy, 36(3), 317–336.
• Gorski, P. C. (2013). Reaching and Teaching Students in Poverty: Strategies for Erasing the Opportunity Gap. Teachers College Press.