Sentences with phrase «differences by family income»

The same holds for class — in fact, achievement differences by family income now equal or exceed those by race.

Not exact matches

Your discretionary income is calculated by finding the difference between your adjusted gross income and 150 percent of the annual poverty line for a family of your size and in your state.

Districts that are higher performing by this indicator actually spend, on average, no more than the lower performing districts (after adjustment for differences in family income, special - education placements, and the percentage of students who are of limited English proficiency).

• Two recently published studies (by Addo, Houle, and Simon and Grinstein - Weiss et al.) use national survey data to show that black students hold substantially more debt by age 25 compared to their white counterparts, and that disparities are evident even after controlling for family income and wealth, indicating that differences in postsecondary and labor market experiences contribute to the debt gap.

The median household income for black families in 2001 was $ 33,600, while it was $ 54,100 for whites, a difference that can be attributed in part to the large number of black families headed by a single parent (see Figure 2).

We compare the test scores of students in each of the seven categories, taking into account differences in the students» socioeconomic characteristics, including parent schooling, self - reported household income, the number of non-school books in the home, and the quality of the peer groups (calculated by averaging family background and home resources for all students in the classroom).

In other words, racial disparities are not solely a function of differences in family income by race.

A significant body of literature also points to differences in access to reading materials by students from low - income families in comparison to their more affluent peers (Allington & McGill - Franzen, 2008).

Parent satisfaction levels vary by household income, with large differences observed for families with incomes of $ 30,000 or less and those with incomes of $ 100,000 or more (Figure 3).

«On average, summer vacation creates a three - month gap in reading achievement between students from low - and middle - income families... even small differences in summer learning can accumulate across the elementary years, resulting in a large achievement gap by the time students enter high school.»

These differences may be partially explained by family background characteristics such as parental education and income.

The coalition believes the Board took a positive step by approving an increased level of ambition in new long - term goals and interim benchmarks, especially for students who have traditionally had less opportunity to excel — children of color, those whose families have less income, English language learners and students who are challenged by learning differences.

Although racial / ethnic differences in private school enrollment are largely explained by income differences, the urban / suburban and regional differences in private school enrollment patterns are large even among families with similar incomes.

Beginning with the now - famous evidence reported by Coleman and his colleagues (1966), study after study suggests that socioeconomic status (SES) of families explains more than half of the difference in student achievement across schools; it is also highly related to violence, dropping out of school, entry to postsecondary education and levels of both adult employment and income.

The definition of «full - time living» is different by country, even by region, as well as the huge difference between income needs for a family with kids to a professional couple or single writer, so be specific about the actual figure you're aiming for.

Again, I challenge this because the definition of «full - time living «is different by country, even by region, as well as the huge difference between income needs from a family with kids to a professional couple or single writer.

Your discretion income is simply the difference between your income and 150 per cent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence as stipulated by the U.S Department of Health and Family Serfamily size and state of residence as stipulated by the U.S Department of Health and Family SerFamily Services.

Discretionary income is the difference between your income and 150 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.For Income - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poincome is the difference between your income and 150 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.For Income - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poincome and 150 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.For Income - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poIncome - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poincome is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poincome and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poverty.

Your discretionary income is calculated by finding the difference between your adjusted gross income and 150 percent of the annual poverty line for a family of your size and in your state.

Discretionary income is «is the difference between your income and 150 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.For Income - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poverty.&income is «is the difference between your income and 150 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.For Income - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poverty.&income and 150 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.For Income - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poverty.&Income - Contingent Repayment, discretionary income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poverty.&income is the difference between your income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poverty.&income and 100 percent of the poverty guideline for your family size and state of residence.The poverty guidelines are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and are available at www.aspe.hhs.gov/poverty.»

For low - income families headed by single mothers, the associations between maternal employment and children's cognitive and social development tend to be neutral or positive, but much of this difference is a function of pre-existing differences between mothers who are or are not employed.2, 3,4,5 The effects of maternal employment on children's development also depend on the characteristics of employment — its quality, extent and timing — and on the child's age.2, 6,7 On the other hand, poverty has consistently negative associations with young children's development, but here, too, there is considerable controversy about the causal role of income per se, as opposed to other correlates of poverty.8, 9,10,11,12,13

The program of prenatal and infancy home visiting by nurses, tested with a primarily white sample, produced a 48 percent treatment - control difference in the overall rates of substantiated rates of child abuse and neglect (irrespective of risk) and an 80 percent difference for families in which the mothers were low - income and unmarried at registration.21 Corresponding rates of child maltreatment were too low to serve as a viable outcome in a subsequent trial of the program in a large sample of urban African - Americans, 20 but program effects on children's health - care encounters for serious injuries and ingestions at child age 2 and reductions in childhood mortality from preventable causes at child age 9 were consistent with the prevention of abuse and neglect.20, 22

In the long term, those participating children are more likely to be employed and less likely to be dependent on government assistance.9 The positive effects are larger, and more likely to be sustained, when programs are high quality.10 In addition, the impact is greatest for children from low - income families.11 Differences in children's cognitive abilities by income are evident at only nine months old and significantly widen by the time children are two years old.12 Children living in poverty are more likely to be subject to stressful home environments — which can have lifelong impacts on learning, cognition, and self - regulation — while parents living in poverty have limited resources to provide for their families and high barriers to accessing affordable, high - quality child care.13 High - quality early learning programs staffed by warm and responsive adults can help mitigate these effects, offering a safe and predictable learning environment that fosters children's development.14

Recent research conducted in mainland China found that obesity prevalence was higher among children in wealthier families, 4 but the patterns were different in Hong Kong with higher rates of childhood obesity among lower income families.4 5 Hong Kong, despite having a per capita gross domestic product of Hong Kong dollar (HK$) 273 550, has large income differences between rich and poor as reflected by a high Gini coefficient of 0.539 reported in 2016; approximately 20 % of the population are living in poverty as defined by a monthly household income below half of the Hong Kong median.6 It is widely accepted that population health tend to be worse in societies with greater income inequalities, and hence low - income families in these societies are particularly at risk of health problems.7 In our previous study, children from Hong Kong Chinese low - income families experienced poorer health and more behavioural problems than other children in the population at similar age.8 Adults from these families also reported poorer health - related quality of life (HRQOL), 9 with 6.1 % of the parents having a known history of mental illness and 18.2 % of them reporting elevated level of stress.

For example, compared to older mothers, teen mothers display lower levels of verbal stimulation and involvement, higher levels of intrusiveness, and maternal speech that is less varied and complex.47, 48 Mothers with fewer years of education read to their children less frequently25, 49 and demonstrate less sophisticated language and literacy skills themselves, 50 which affects the quantity and quality of their verbal interactions with their children.2 Parental education, in turn, relates to household income: poverty and persistent poverty are strongly associated with less stimulating home environments, 51 and parents living in poverty have children who are at risk for cognitive, academic, and social - emotional difficulties.52, 53 Finally, Hispanic and African American mothers are, on average, less likely to read to their children than White, non-Hispanic mothers; 54 and Spanish - speaking Hispanic families have fewer children's books available in the home as compared to their non-Hispanic counterparts.25 These racial and ethnic findings are likely explained by differences in family resources across groups, as minority status is often associated with various social - demographic risks.

We addressed some of the prior criticisms of EBT research by ensuring that (1) participants and study context were clinically representative, (2) there were no systematic differences in clinician competence across conditions (ie, all clinicians were randomly assigned), and (3) the sample would include the ethnic diversity that critics have found insufficient in the randomized controlled trial literature.17 - 20 Accordingly, we obtained samples from outpatient treatment programs that served the general public across a broad demographic and income range, we included only youths whose families sought treatment (ie, no recruiting or advertising), all treatment was provided by professional clinicians employed in the participating programs, and all treatment was provided in those programs (ie, not in university laboratory clinics).