Schools in Clark, Floyd counties see increase in child poverty

According to the 2015 Kids Count Profile of Indiana produced by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, 22 percent of the state's children were living in poverty in 2013, whereas in 2008, that number was 18 percent.

But the news wasn't all bad. Out of the 16 measures for child well-being in the report, Indiana improved in or stayed the same in 12 of them. Of those, more fourth graders were proficient in reading, more eighth graders were proficient in math and more high school students were graduating on time.

However, Glenn Augustine, interim CEO and vice president of the Indiana Youth Institute, said while a lot of measures got better, children living in poverty still have a lot to overcome than their peers who live in higher-income households.

"It may not be completely surprising to see that number remaining high, but it's certainly not comfortable seeing that number remaining high, especially for children who may not know where their next meal is coming from or may not have a roof over their heads," Augustine said.

Furthermore, the study shows more children living in high-poverty areas has also increased statewide from 8 percent in 2009 to 12 percent in 2013.

Augustine said that's troubling because students from those families might have a harder time digging themselves out, especially since there's less opportunity for help.

"Living in poverty is difficult enough, living in a high-poverty area is even harder," Augustine said. "There may not be access to fresh food or transportation. There's less opportunity for neighbor to help neighbor."

With the numbers growing, schools have done more to step in to help students academically, but also with basic needs at home.

LOCAL IMPACT

Every district in Clark and Floyd counties saw a similar increase, though they used a different measure to gauge poverty among their student populations. While the Kids Count report used the Federal Poverty Level household income measure, school districts generally follow students in poverty by using the percentage of children on free or reduced lunch, which puts household income higher than the FPL. Families who qualify for free or reduced lunch don't always apply for the program, though.

Districts tend to see a connection between students coming from depressed socioeconomic backgrounds and lower performance in academics. Amy Schellenberg, executive director for educational services for Greater Clark County Schools, said they've been following an increase in impoverished students for a few years.

"There's been kind of a slow rise in the number," Schellenberg said. "Back in around 2011 is when we kind of started to take notice of our Title I dollars. That's when we started serving secondary schools . It used to be with the secondary school, they wouldn't apply for free and reduced lunch. Suddenly, we started to see a trend where more and more were."

In Greater Clark, 35.9 percent of the student body was on free or reduced lunch in the 2008-2009 school year. That grew to 46.3 percent in the 2013-2014 school year. While the percentage of homeless students remained below one percent for the entire time period, the number grew from 50 to 96.

She said keeping track of student performance in different demographics has been a part of education for several years, as has helping students who may be at a disadvantage to their peers.

"I think it definitely something that we're sensitive to," Schellenberg said. "Culturally, when you look at the needs of all students, that conversation started with No Child Left Behind. We couldn't rest on the laurels of how our whole group was doing. If our whole group was performing on one level, we had to look at our free and reduced students, or our Hispanic students."

Though students who may not have adequate access to food or transportation at home have more difficulty, Schellenberg said Greater Clark tries to find effective teaching strategies for all students in the classroom by using 30-minute blocks of time to either push students beyond grade-level expectations or to catch them up.

John Reed, assistant superintendent at West Clark Community Schools, said the increase from 2008 to 2013 was about 5 percentage points. In 2008, 30.5 percent of the district's students were on free or reduced lunch. In 2013, that number grew to 35.2 percent.

As one of the fastest growing school districts in the state, Reed said that often brings in students from a variety of backgrounds. For the most part, he said getting students to succeed academically — in spite of their background — is focusing on their reading skills.

"At the elementaries is where we really hit them the hardest," Reed said. "We concentrate on reading and firmly believe that if they don't learn how to read, they're going to know how to learn. We teach them to learn to read from kindergarten to third grade. We concentrate our Title I programs at especially those grade levels."

He said they're moving that strategy all the way up to the sixth grade, using a variety of instructional strategies for students who are struggling.

For the New Albany-Floyd County Consolidated School Corp., the district went from 37 percent of students on free or reduced lunch in 2008 to 44 percent in 2013.

Tony Duffy, director of elementary education and Title I at the district, said in an email that their figures weren't calculated in the same manner as the Anne E. Casey Foundation's, but they use a standard measure of students who receive free or reduced lunch.

Duffy said the district tries to help out students and their families in a variety of ways outside of academics, especially since outside factors like access to food or housing affect students academically.

For example, he said programs like Blessings in a Backpack — which sends home students with food over weekends or other breaks, especially since school breakfast and lunch may be their only meals otherwise — help children across the district.

Duffy said the district works to make sure children are taken care of educationally, but also to make sure their needs are met.

"The core purpose of NA-FC Schools is to provide high levels of learning for all students," Duffy said. "We accomplish this by developing a strong core curriculum and working as a Professional Learning Community with a culture of collaboration and a focus on results. We developed a systematic leveled intervention and enrichment plan that structures learning for all students by providing more time, support, and opportunities to learn. Title I funds are used in very strategic ways to support this plan."

In Clarksville Community Schools, 58 percent of the students were on free or reduced lunch in 2009. In 2013, that demographic jumped to 71 percent. Kim Knott, superintendent, said educational needs aren't the only ones schools try to fill.

"[Our staff will] go out and personally buy clothing for our students," Knott said. "They give of their own personal funds to help these families to buy food, clothing and school supplies. Our staff readily steps up to the plate to provide for our students."

She said though poverty can make school more difficult for students, their family's income isn't a measure of their capability.

"What people have to know is that poverty is not an academic issue," Knott said. "Poverty has nothing to do with a child's ability to excel academically. The issue is, what does the child bring to the classroom as a result of poverty that has to be dealt with before learning can take place?"