DOES THE LABEL “FOSTER CHILD” HAVE AN AFFECT ON HOW THEY ARE
TREATED BY THEIR TEACHERS?
Corey Marcelle Smith
B.A., California State University, Sonoma, 2008
PROJECT
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK
at
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO
SPRING
2011
DOES THE LABEL “FOSTER CHILD” HAVE AN AFFECT ON HOW THEY ARE
TREATED BY THEIR TEACHERS?
A Project
by
Corey Marcelle Smith
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair
Maura O’Keefe, Ph.D., M.S.W.
____________________________
Date
ii
Student: Corey Marcelle Smith
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to
be awarded for the Project.
_______________________________, Graduate Coordinator
Teiahsha Bankhead, Ph.D., L.C.S.W.
Division of Social Work
iii
________________
Date
Abstract
of
DOES THE LABEL “FOSTER CHILD” HAVE AN AFFECT ON HOW THEY ARE
TREATED BY THEIR TEACHERS?
by
Corey Marcelle Smith
If educators, administrators, and the school system continue to not provide the services
needed to foster youth and proceed to treat them differently than their classmates,
children within the foster care system will continue to struggle with their education, not
only academically but also with peer relations. Foster youth are aware of the negative
stigma that can accompany the label “foster child” and they may begin to take on the
attributes that are expected of them following this label.
Foster youth tend to require more services to aid them with their educational goals.
Unfortunately, they are sometimes receiving fewer services than their classmates.
Teachers and administrators also lack the proper knowledge about how being placed with
in the foster care system may have effects on a child, which in turn may cause them to act
out at school. If teachers were made aware and worked with the foster youth at their
level, there would be more opportunities for foster youth to attain their educational goals.
This researcher conducted eight interviews, which were all audio taped. This researcher
played each interview back and transcribed all of the interviews. After transcribing, this
researcher began the process of coding. After organizing common concepts, this
iv
researcher began to memo and sort key ideas together to develop main ideas based on
similar ideas that the participants expressed in each of their own interviews.
Participants of this study included eight teachers from the Solano County area with
varying levels of experience. Participants taught in classrooms ranging from elementary
school to high school.
Findings of the study were that educators had an overall negative view of foster youth.
This could be due to the fact that educators are unaware of a child’s status of being in the
foster care system until a behavioral problem has occurred. Thus, foster child and
behavior problems become synonymous.
Teachers come to expect all foster youth to
behave poorly because they are only aware of foster students who cause disruptions.
__________________________, Committee Chair
Maura O’Keefe, Ph.D., M.S.W.
_______________________
Date
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge my parents, Richard and Karen Smith, for all of their
love, support, and encouragement that they have provided me with during my academic
career. It simply would not have been possible without them. I’d like to thank my
fiancé, Jon Borgen, for his support and reminders to take small bites out of the elephant at
a time and for his help in editing this project. To my grandmother, Ione Morgan, who
inspired me to never take my education for granted and encouraged me to continue
learning. And lastly, to all of the foster youth I have come in contact with that inspired
the topic of this project. Their daily struggles and what they dealt with in the educational
system needs to be addressed. They have taught me more than I could ever teach them.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgments....................................................................................................... vi
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………1
Background of Problem .....................................................................................2
Statement of the Research Problem .................................................................. 5
Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................... 6
Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................... 6
Definition of Terms........................................................................................... 9
Assumptions.................................................................................................... 12
Justification ..................................................................................................... 12
Limitations ...................................................................................................... 13
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................... 15
Historical Background .................................................................................... 15
Views of the Foster Care System .................................................................... 16
Affects of Abuse and Neglect ......................................................................... 19
Educational Affects ......................................................................................... 21
Discrimination Due to Labels ......................................................................... 28
Gaps in the Literature...................................................................................... 32
Summary ......................................................................................................... 33
3. METHODS ........................................................................................................... 34
Design ............................................................................................................. 34
Research Question .......................................................................................... 34
Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 35
Participants ...................................................................................................... 36
Procedures ....................................................................................................... 36
Protection of Human Subjects ........................................................................ 36
vii
4. FINDINGS ............................................................................................................ 38
Participant Demographics ............................................................................... 38
Themes ............................................................................................................ 39
Summary ......................................................................................................... 46
5. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL WORK ........................ 48
Review of Findings and Relevance................................................................. 48
Implications..................................................................................................... 51
Recommendation for Future Research ............................................................ 53
References ................................................................................................................... 55
viii
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Labeling a person based off of assumptions or hearsay rarely has a positive affect.
When a person is labeled, it can come with a negative assumption that causes the labeled
person to be treated unfairly and unjustly.
While working at a foster care agency, I had the opportunity to spend time with
different foster youth and was able to interact with them and their teachers. During this
time, I made a few observations on how the foster youth I worked with were treated
differently than children who lived with their biological parents. I noticed that many
times the foster youth I worked with weren’t given second chances and they were treated
like lost causes. This made me question one of the teachers of a foster youth. The
teacher explained that she understood that this particular student was in foster care and in
her experience, foster youth tended to act out more in class. This teacher also said that
foster youth tend not to stay in one school for very often, therefore it makes more sense
for the extra efforts of teachers to be used with other students.
Because of this teacher’s honesty and how I witnessed some of the other children
being treated by other educators, I saw this as an extreme problem. If one teacher was
being honest, how many others are out there that treat foster youth the same but aren’t
honest about it, or even recognize that they are doing so?
The label “foster child” may have negative affects on the way the child is seen by
their teachers and educators. Because of the assumptions that foster youth are more
difficult and harder to deal with, lacking support at home, possibility that they would be
2
transferring schools soon anyway, pre-conceived ideas about foster youth develop that
can harm them and prevent them from having an equal opportunity within the educational
system. This study is aimed at the idea of labeling a foster child and how prevalent it is
within the school systems.
Background of the Problem
There are an estimated 510,000 children today who are in the foster care system
(Foster Care Statistics, 2010). Among these, the children who are old enough are
attending school everyday where they have encounters with educators, teachers, and
administrators.
According to a 2003 study by the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care,
57% of voters said their primary source of information about foster care came from the
news and other media (Pew, 2003). There is no training or requirements of teachers to
have knowledge of the foster care system or what a child in foster care may experience
and how trauma may affect the child’s behaviors while at school.
Foster children experience high rates of poor school achievement and failure.
They are often at least one grade level behind and have higher absentee and tardiness
rates than other children. Their school records are typically incomplete; missing
transcripts and immunization records can delay enrollment. Youth in foster care can lose
credits when they move a few weeks before the end of the semester. They are also at
higher risk for dropping out of school and not completing a graduate equivalency degree
(McKellar, 2007).
3
Behavior problems are found more frequently in foster children than their
classmates. Foster children often do poorly in unstructured activities such as recess. Their
tendency to be easily victimized or to start fights can elicit aggressive behavior from their
peers, who may be perceived as treating them as their biological parents did, thus
reinforcing the foster child’s belief that he or she is bad and deserving of abuse. They
may test the limits of authority, have angry outbursts when asked to do something, or
avoid contact with authority figures all together. Teachers have noted particularly poor
attention and work-study habits in some foster children.
There are a disproportionate number of foster children in special education. The
most common disabilities among foster children are learning disabilities, mental
retardation, and emotional disturbance. Conduct Disorder, although not a disability itself
under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is the most prevalent single
disorder (McKellar, 2007).
Depression, anxiety, eating disorders, suicide attempts, panic disorder,
dissociative disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, depression, anger, posttraumatic stress disorder, and reactive attachment disorder have all been directly linked to
child abuse or neglect (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2008; Silverman, Reinherz,
& Giaconia, 1996; Springer, Sheridan, Kuo, & Carnes, 2007).
Foster youth need
extra services due to their experiences and trauma and without the proper knowledge or
understanding; it could be quite simple for teachers to label foster youth as “trouble
makers”.
4
From August 2005 to July 2006, a study was conducted that consisted of four
different focus groups. Each focus group consisted of participants who were involved in
the lives of foster youth, from foster parents to educational liaisons. In all instances,
struggles with the schools were one of the strongest themes. Caregivers had a difficult
time getting the schools to acknowledge that their children required extra services and
had difficulty in getting their children more intensive support within the school setting.
Throughout the study, there were numerous examples from caregivers that described their
foster youth getting into trouble repeatedly and then were unable to progress
academically because they were not getting the support that they needed. Principals and
deans were described as not very understanding and “ready to kick out any student with a
behavior problem or to move them to another school. That’s exactly the opposite of what
these kids need” (Zetlin, Weinberg, & Shea, 2010). While many foster youth have been
in numerous placements and lack stability at home, having that same lack of stability at
school will also have negative affects on their education and growth. Foster youth may
have a difficult time at school because of their own emotional and behavioral needs, and
with the added label of “foster child”, the discrimination can occur further.
The Center for Social Services Research in Berkeley, CA (2001) conducted a
study in which educators reported that systematic labeling could result in foster children
being perceived differently and therefore not receive the same opportunities as their
classmates. This study also found that many educators felt as though their school district
should not be financially responsible for another district’s child (Center for Social
5
Services Research, 2001). Labeling cannot only affect how others view foster youth, but
how foster youth view themselves.
One study of adolescents in a group home perceived that negative stereotypes of
“delinquent” or “psychologically impaired” were held and applied to them. The youths
in the study reported feeling stigmatized based on their label “foster child”. They
reported negative feelings based on the label and stigma of what the majority of society
feels a foster child is like (Kools, 1997). Foster youth may continue to struggle with that
label and what others expect of them based on that label.
Statement of the Research Problem
If educators, administrators, and the school system continue to not provide the
services needed to foster youth and proceed to treat them differently than their
classmates, children within the foster care system will continue to struggle with their
education, not only academically but also with peer relations. Foster youth are aware of
the negative stigma that can accompany the label “foster child” and they may begin to
take on the attributes that are expected of them following this label.
Foster youth tend to require more services to aid them with their educational
goals. Unfortunately, they are sometimes receiving fewer services than their classmates.
Teachers and administrators also lack the proper knowledge about how being
placed with in the foster care system may have effects on a child, which in turn may
cause them to act out at school. If teachers were made aware and worked with the foster
youth at their level, there would be more opportunities for foster youth to attain their
educational goals.
6
Purpose of the Study
This study aims to bring awareness to any discrimination that may be taking place
due to preconceived ideas about youth in the foster care system and how the label “foster
child” may cause educators to treat foster youth differently than their other students. By
bringing awareness to the discrimination, this study hopes that educators may see this
problem for what it is and will seek further training, and/or attempt to determine why
they are treating foster youth differently and make efforts to instead help foster youth
attain their academic goals.
Theoretical Framework
Howard Becker (1963) discussed the labeling theory and how certain labels are
given to certain groups of people. Those people groups will then in turn feel the need to
fulfill the labels that have been given to them, even if those labels are assumptions.
Becker discusses deviance, which can be closely related to a foster child in the school
system being seen as a “bad kid” or a “trouble maker”. Becker states that deviance is
created by society. Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction
constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them
as outsiders (1963).
The degree, to which an act will be treated as deviant or a behavior problem,
depends on who is committing the act and who feels as if they have been harmed by it.
Rules tend to be applied more to some than to others. Studies of juveniles make the point
clearly. Boys from middle-class areas do not get as far in the legal process when they are
apprehended, as do boys from slum areas. The middle class boy is less likely when taken
7
to the station to be booked; and it is extremely unlikely that he will be convicted and
sentenced (Cohen and Short, 1961). This variation occurs even though the original
infraction of the rule is the same in the two cases. Similarly, the law is differentially
applied to African Americans and Whites. It is well known that an African American
believed to have attacked a white woman is much more likely to be punished than a white
man who commits the same offense (Cohen and Short, 1961). People’s perceptions of
African Americans and any assumptions they have towards that population can have a
very negative affect, which can result in harsher consequences.
Being branded with a negative label has important consequences for one’s further
social participation and self-image. The most important consequence is a change in the
individual’s public identity, being revealed as a different kind of person from the kind
one is supposed to be (Becker, 1963).
Everett Hughes (1945) notes that most statuses or labels have one key trait, which
serves to distinguish those who belong from those who do not. For example, a doctor,
whatever else he may be, is a person who has a certificate stating that he has fulfilled
certain requirements and is licensed to practice medicine; this is his master trait. As
Hughes points out, in our society and culture, a doctor is also informally expected to have
a number of auxiliary traits: most people expect him to be upper middle-class, white, and
male. When he doesn’t fit that criterion, there is a sense that he has in some way failed to
fill that expectation. Similarly, an African American is informally expected to have
certain status traits and not to have others; people are surprised and find it anomalous if
an African American turns out to be a doctor or a college professor. People often have
8
the master status trait but lack some of the auxiliary, informally expected characteristics,
for example, one may be a doctor but be a female, or another ethnicity besides white
(Hughes, 1945).
Hughes (1945) deals with this phenomenon in regard to statuses that are positive,
desired, and desirable (noting that one may have the formal qualifications for entry into a
status but be denied full entry because of lack of the proper auxiliary traits), but the same
process occurs in the case of negative statuses. Possession of one undesirable trait may
have a generalized symbolic value, so that people automatically assume that its bearer
possesses other negative traits allegedly associated with it. Some statuses or labels in our
society override all other labels and have a certain priority; race for example will override most other status considerations in other situations. The fact that one may be a
physician or middle-class or female will not protect one from being treated differently
due to their race first and any of these other things second. The status of deviant,
troublemaker, or bad kid, is this kind of master status. One receives the status as a result
of breaking a rule and the identification proves to be more important than most others.
One will be identified as a troublemaker, or deviant first, before other identifications are
made (1945).
Labeling Theory states that most people occasionally act in a deviant way, and the
crucial issue is the response of the surrounding social environment to that act (Plummer,
2008). Sometimes, people are put through a social system that labels them as “deviant”
or “criminal,” or foster children as being “troubled” or “aggressive” (2008). Once
labeled, they are likely to live up to the social expectations of their label and are
9
encouraged to act in more deviant ways; this leads to an even stronger labeling process.
The label that is given to the person defines the behaviors. In the example above, a
person who is labeled a criminal, or a child who is labeled a “bad kid,” will have more
negative behaviors to live up to that label. If a child is labeled as a good kid, or as
intelligent, those labels could have positive effects on that child or person.
Problems and strengths are identified by the labels, or to the client’s reactions to
the labels. A person can have a deviant label, but if they act outside of that label and
have positive behavior, that could be seen as a strength, especially due to the fact that
many people feel as though they need to live up to their label. The theory is concerned
with how the self-identity and behavior of individuals may be determined or influenced
by the terms used to describe or classify them, and is associated with the concept of a
self-fulfilling prophecy and stereotyping. Many foster children suffer from negative
labels in schools and therefore teachers will have a negative perspective or outlook about
them, treating them differently than if there was no label. A person will perceive another
differently based on if they are labeled or not. Being aware of labels will help people to
be more tolerant and will encourage others to make decisions based on what they know
about the person instead of what others have said (Plummer, 2008).
Definition of Terms
Foster child/youth
A minor who has been made a ward of the state and placed into foster care (Pew,
2003).
Foster care
10
Term used for a system in which a minor who has been made a ward of the state
is placed in a private home of a certified caregiver referred to as a foster parent.
Children may enter foster care via voluntary or involuntary means. Voluntary
placement may occur when a biological parent or lawful guardian is unable or
unwilling to care for a child. Involuntary placement occurs when a child is
removed from their biological parent or lawful guardian due to the risk or actual
occurrence of physical or psychological harm. In the US, most children enter
foster care due to neglect (Pew, 2003).
Foster parent
A person who acts as parent and guardian for a child in place of the child's natural
parents, but without legally adopting the child (Pew, 2003).
Group home
An alternative to traditional in-home foster care for children, in which children
are housed in an intimate or home-like setting, in which a number of unrelated
children live for varying periods of time with a single set of house parents, or with
a rotating staff of trained caregivers. More specialized therapeutic or treatment
group homes have specially-trained staff to assist children with emotional and
behavioral difficulties. The make-up and staffing of the group home can be
adapted to meet the unique needs of its residents (Group Home, 2011).
Label
A classifying phrase or name applied to a person or thing, especially one that is
inaccurate or restrictive (Merriam-Webster, 2011).
11
Child Abuse (Physical)
Any non-accidental physical injury to a child. Can include striking, kicking,
burning, or biting the child, or any action that results in a physical impairment of
the child (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2009).
Neglect
The failure of a parent or other person with responsibility for the child to provide
needed food, clothing, shelter, medical care, or supervision such that the child's
health, safety, and well-being are threatened with harm (Child Welfare
Information Gateway, 2009).
IEP
An Individualized Education Plan or (IEP) is a written plan and legal document
that states a child's present level of functioning; specific areas that need special
services; annual goals; short-term objectives; services to be provided; and the
method of evaluation to be implemented for children 3 to 21 years of age who
have been determined eligible for special education. The committee is composed
of a student, a teacher, counselor, parent, and a special education person who
meet to review the year's work and plan for the coming year. This can also
include a social worker or foster parent in the case of a foster youth (Center for
Child and Family Studies, 2005).
Caseworker
A caseworker is a type of social worker who is employed by a government
agency, a non-profit organization or other group to take on the cases of
12
individuals and provide them with advocacy, information or other services
(United States Department of Labor, 2005).
Assumptions
Every child who is in the foster care system is living with someone who is not his
or her biological parents. They could be living with certified foster parents from an
agency, whom the child has never met before, or they could be living with relatives who
are not their legal guardians.
All participants in the study have had some experience with foster youth within
the school setting.
Schools mentioned within this researcher’s study and schools mentioned within
the research are all public schools.
Justification
Results of this research study will bring light to a problem that has yet to be
addressed. According to the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics
(2008), the core values of service, social justice, dignity and worth of the person,
importance of human relationships integrity, and competence are all ideals that all social
workers should aspire to.
The value of services states “’social workers’ primary goal is to help people in
need and to address social problems” (NASW, 2008). Social workers are able to work
with foster youth and have the ability to serve them and advocate for them in all areas,
including schools.
13
This study will also help address another core value of the NASW Code of Ethics
(2008), which is the value of social justice. Foster youth being discriminated against and
treated differently than their classmates based solely on a label is a problem. Social
workers can challenge this social injustice and pursue change on behalf of this vulnerable
population.
Dignity and worth of the person is another value of the NASW Code of Ethics
(2008). Social workers respect the inherent dignity and worth of a person. Social
workers treat each person in a caring and respectful fashion no matter the person’s
culture, religion, sexual orientation, or any other factor. Foster youth are often an
overlooked population and therefore may not be treated with the dignity and respect that
they deserve. By advocating for representing foster youth, social workers will be able to
uphold to this core value.
This study will also bring awareness to teachers about the foster care system and
may encourage educators to seek more training or to pursue knowledge about what it is
like for a foster youth in the school system. By promoting further education or training,
teachers will be better equipped and will possess more tools on how to work with foster
youth instead of dismissing them as “trouble makers”.
Limitations
One limitation of this study is that it is a fairly small sample size consisting of
eight participants. Because this study contains qualitative data, it will not have the same
size sampling as a quantitative study.
14
Some participants might not be as honest about their opinions or views of foster
youth in fear of how they will be perceived by the interviewer. Stating that they have a
bias or that they discriminate against some of their students may illuminate them in a
poor light and therefore, participants may change their answers to be more positive.
All participants of the study teach in and around the same socio-economic
population. This study does not contain data from participants who work with a lower
socio-economic background or a more diverse population.
15
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Giving children labels affects how others treat them, both positively and
negatively. Growing up in the foster care system places children at higher risk for
developing attachment disorders, behavioral disorders, or depressive disorders (Delaney,
1998, p 15). A child in the foster care system may then not only have a mental health
label but also a label as the result of growing up in multiple homes and/or being subjected
to abuse or neglect, resulting in the label of “foster child”. This literature review is going
to discuss the history of children in foster care, how the general population views the
foster care system, affects of abuse and/or neglect, living in out of home placements, the
educational affects, and finally how the labels that children obtain within the system can
cause discrimination against them from their peers and within the school setting. Any
gaps that are in the literature are also going to be discussed.
Historical Background
Before foster care came about in the early 20th century, institutions and
orphanages were where children without families were placed. In 1910, Henry Dwight
Chapin, a New York pediatrician, circulated statistics showing that orphanages literally
sickened and killed alarming numbers of children (Herman, 2007). Adults started to take
children into their homes in exchange for labor, or agencies paid families to take the
children. By 1950, statistics showed that children in foster homes outweighed the
number of children in orphanages. By 1960 there were more than twice as many in foster
care and by the late 1970s, the foster child population exceeded 500,000, roughly where
16
it stands today (History, 2010, Herman, 2007). Today, children may be placed in out of
home care due to sexual or physical abuse occuring within the home, neglect, or putting a
child in harm’s way. As of September 30, 2006, there were an estimated 510,000
children in foster care. Almost a quarter (24%) were in relative homes, and nearly half
(46%) were in nonrelative foster family homes (Foster Care Statistics, 2010).
Views of the Foster Care System
Coady, Fine, & Palmer (2001) conducted an anecdottle study based on questions
about people’s perceptions of the foster care system. There was not much praise for child
welfare agencies in general, although individual workers were often positively evaluated.
The study focused mostly on parents whose children were removed from their care and
put into the foster care system. Unresponsiveness was a key complaint. Parents said it
took great effort for them to get help from CPS agencies. Respondents reported CPS
agencies making many demands of them to see their children without much guidance or
assistance (Coady et. al., 2001).
In a 2003, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care conducted a survey
among registered voters nationwide. The purpose of this research was to gauge voters'
opinions of and attitudes toward the foster care system and to determine what, if any,
changes voters believe must be made to the foster care system. The sample comprises
812 randomly selected voters and carries a margin of error of +/- 3.44%. There were five
key findings that emerged from this survey.
The first key finding was that 73% of voters said they were at least somewhat
familiar with foster care and 33% saying that they were very familiar. 57% of voters said
17
their primary source of information about foster care is the news and other media, 37%
said that most of the their information comes from personal experience with the system or
through friends or family (Pew, 2003).
The second key finding was that 56% of voters said that they had a favorable
opinon of foster care in their community and 21% characterized their feelings as very
favorable. 53% of these voters believed that the foster care system needed a complete
overhaul. This view was expressed most by those most familiar with foster care (Pew,
2003).
The third key point was that even though most children who enter foster care do
so because of parental neglect, Americans are as likely to attribute children entering
foster care to abuse as neglect. Only 36% of respondents correctly recognized the fact
that the vast majority of children are taken from their biological parents because their
health and safety needs are neglected. Just as many voters (37%) said that most children
enter foster care because of abuse by a parent. Voters who were most familiar with the
foster care system or who had direct experience with it were only slightly more likely
than the other voters overall to correctly identify neglegence as the main reason for
children entering the system (Pew, 2003).
The fourth key point was that judges and caseworkers, whose job it is to protect
and help children in foster care, received lukewarm reviews from the voting public. Only
8% of voters reported having a lot of confidence that the judges and case workers who
place and oversee children in foster care have the resources, skills, and time needed to
make the right decisions for these children.
An additional 35% and 32% said that they
18
had a fair amout of confidence that this was the case. Voters who were more familiar
with foster care were slightly more confident in judges than are voters overall, but their
confidence in caseworkers was about the same (Pew, 2003).
The fifth key finding was that voters had a mixed view of foster parents’
motivations. While 42% of voters said that most people who become foster parents do so
out of concern for children, a substantial proportion (29%) believed that foster parents are
mostly interested in financial gain. The latter group is among the most likely to feel
unfavorable toward foster care in their community and to see the need for major changes
in the foster care system. This suggests that many voters’ perceptions of foster parents
ties in with their attitudes toward the foster care system. Overall, the results of this
survey showed that voters do not fully believe that the system can help and protect the
children in its care. American voters clearly do not have much confidence in the foster
care system and do not view the system in a positive light (Pew, 2003).
Another study was conducted, this time the sample was children who had been
removed from their biological homes to live in out-of-home placements. These children
had some positive and negative reactions to the foster care system. Festinger (1983) did a
study where she found some positive responses from youth in foster care. They expressed
satisfaction about understanding the reasons for their placement, feeling they had enough
contact with their parents, and being able to participate in decisions that impacted their
lives. Positive responses are rare though when it comes to asking foster youth about their
current situations in their out-of-home placements.
19
There seemed to be more negative than positive feedback when it came to youth’s
views of foster care. Youths reported a number of negative experiences: feeling
powerless; being disrespected; being unsafe; being stigmatized or marginalized;
discontinuity of homes and service providers; conflict about relationships with their
families; inadequate preparation for independence; and hardship in the transition from
care (Coady et al., 2001).
Another study interviewed children who had been in the foster care system for at
least 1 year. The data came from a national probablity sample of children placed in child
welfare, specifically foster care. The findings of this study indicated that children
generally felt positive toward their out-of-home care providers and maintained hope for
reunification with their biological family (Barth, Chapman, & Wall, 2004). While
children in this study felt positive toward their care providers or “foster parents”, their
view of the foster care system itself was negative. The children reported feeling
frustration and anxiety when moving to different placements and they didn’t feel as if
they were being listened to by their social workers (Barth et. al., 2004). Within that same
study, adults who were previously in the foster care system continually reported their
concerns about education during their years in care. Most felt that they were
underprepared and that not enough attention was paid to their educational needs (Barth et
al., 2004).
Affects of Abuse and Neglect
Abuse or neglect by early caregivers paired with the experience of moving from
one foster placement to another does immeasurable damage to the child’s mental health
20
(Delaney, 1993). Among other things, the child has developed a limited capacity to
relate genuinely to others, to behave age-appropriately, to empathize, to feel guilt or
remorese, and to grow attached and to control his aggressive impulses (Delaney). Based
upon their own history of abuse, neglect, abandonment, rejection and loss, the child feels
insecure, apprehensive and wary about the world (Delaney, 1993). Research studies
show that children in foster care represent a high-risk population for socioemotional,
behavioral, and psychiatric problems warranting mental health treatment (Curtis, Dale,
Kendall, & Rockefeller, 1999; Mash, & Wolfe, 2003).
In a 2003 study, a phone survey was conducted of over 4,000 youths between 1217 years. This study showed that 16% of boys and 19% of girls met the criteria for
either post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive episodes, or substance
abuse/dependence in relation to acts of violence (Kilpatrick, Ruggiero,
Acierno,Saunders, Resnick, & Best, 2003). When comparing these results to another
study of children in foster care, numbers were drastically higher.
Study results by Allison Dubner and Robert Motta (1999) indicated that over
60% of the sexually abused foster care children in their study were diagnosed as having
PTSD. The physically abused group also showed substantial rates of PTSD, as did
almost one fifth of the non-abused children. The relatively high rates of PTSD among the
non-abused children may have been due to other forms of trauma they reported such as
witnessing acts of domestic violence and violent crimes (Dubner, & Motta, 1999).
Depression, anxiety, eating disorders, suicide attempts, panic disorder,
dissociative disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, depression, anger, post-
21
traumatic stress disorder, and reactive attachment disorder have all been directly linked to
child abuse or neglect (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2008; Silverman, Reinherz,
& Giaconia, 1996; Springer, Sheridan, Kuo, & Carnes, 2007).
In one long-term study, a representative sample of 375 young people, 80% of
young adults who had been abused met the diagnostic criteria for at least one psychiatric
disorder by age 21 (Silverman et. al, 1996).
Educational Affects
Children in foster care are often the most vulnerable children in the school
system. They demonstrate a variety of academic difficulties including weaker cognitive
abilities, poorer academic performance and classroom achievement. These difficulties
lead many children in foster care to experience grade retention and placement below ageappropriate grade levels. Children in foster care demonstrate behavioral problems in
school settings ranging from aggressive, demanding, immature, and attention seeking
behaviors to withdrawn, anxious, and over-compliant behaviors. They have higher rates
of absenteeism and tardiness than their classroom peers, which contribute to poor
academic performance and behavioral problems (Altshuler, 1997; Fox & Acuri 1980).
Foster youths are more likely than their peers to struggle academically, socially,
and behaviorally. When compared with the school population as a whole, three-fourths
perform below grade level while more than half have been retained at least one year in
school. They tend to perform significantly lower on standardized tests in reading and
mathematics and earn lower grades in these subjects. Foster youth exhibit more
22
internalizing and externalizing behavioral problems in the school setting then children
resided with their biological parents (Zetlin, Weinberg, & Shea, 2010, p. 254)
From August 2005 to July 2006, Zetlin et. al conducted four focus group sessions
to hear from three distinct groups about their experiences with addressing the schooling
of children in the foster care system. Two focus groups consisted of foster parents and
relative caregivers from two different California counties, one consisted of school district
counselors and foster youth liaisons from one of the largest school districts in the nation,
and the last consisted of education liaisons from Child Welfare or advocacy agencies in
four California counties. They used the focus group methodology because this research
strategy allows ideas to emerge easier through the interactions and free-flowing
discussions among participants. Separate focus group sessions were conducted because
the key constituents were presumed to have conflictive relationships that they wanted
revealed (Zetlin et. al, p. 246).
Participants consisted of 13 caregivers within the two focus groups – seven from
one county attended one focus group session, and six from the other county comprised
the other group. They cared for a total of 33 children, with one to six children in their
homes. All but one caregiver were women. Three were relative caregivers (that is,
grandparents or aunt), and six had adopted some or all the children in their care. The
children ranged in age from three years to 23 years; some had been cared for since birth.
School liaisons also participated in a focus group consisting of three social workers that
were members of the foster care unit within the school district. The unit coordinator
identified seven counselors who worked at schools or in support units in
23
which foster youths receive services. Two of the counselors had previously been
classroom teachers and had foster children in their classes. All agreed to participate in the
focus group. Six education liaisons that had been placed in the role as advocates
for foster youths by their respective agencies agreed to participate as well. They came
from three geographic areas of the state – southern, central, and northern California. Four
were employed by their county Child Welfare Agency (CWA), one was the coordinator
of a court-appointed special advocate's office, and one served as the lead social worker
addressing foster care issues of a large school district. Four had backgrounds in social
work, one had been a teacher before becoming a CWA liaison, and one had a counseling
background (Zetlin et al., p. 246-247).
The focus group meetings lasted approximately 60 to 90 minutes, during which
each set of participants were asked a series of questions. Caregivers were asked seven
questions about their children's schooling experience while school liaisons and
education advocates were asked 11 questions that focused on their experiences dealing
with caregivers, the school and Child Welfare systems (Zetlin et. al., p. 247).
The educator and Child Welfare focus group sessions were audio taped and the
tapes were transcribed verbatim. Because caregivers were sensitive about their privacy,
detailed notes were handwritten during the two caregiver focus group meetings by two of
the authors who attended the sessions. Each focus group meeting was analyzed separately
using an analytical and iterative process. Notes and transcriptions from the focus groups
were read independently by two or more of the authors and assigned preliminary codes
for responses and relationships between responses. The authors then discussed the
24
evolving coding scheme and continued to refine and revise the scheme until a list of
agreed-on themes was finalized for each set of transcripts. The focus group data was then
fully analyzed using the coding schemes and the coded data was examined for accuracy
and completeness; any differences in coding of transcripts were discussed until
reconciled. A summary of the three sets of focus groups' themes are as follows (Zetlin et.
al., p. 248).
Caregivers had a difficult time searching for extra resources for the children in
their care. Each caregiver reported that the children in their homes had a multitude of
medical, learning, and behavioral problems. In all instances, caregivers actively sought
outside help to address the children’s many needs. Struggles with schools were one of
the strongest themes for them. Caregivers had a difficult time getting the schools to
acknowledge that their children needed services for their learning/behavior problems and
difficulty in getting them to provide more intensive support for challenging their children.
These caregivers described young children who suffered from medical and behavioral
disorders such as prenatal exposure to drugs and alcohol, post-traumatic stress, bipolar,
obsessive-compulsive disorder, depression, anxiety, migraines, and/or irritable bowel
syndrome. At school the children got into repeated trouble on the school bus, were
suspended numerous times from school, had attention deficit disorder or school phobia,
had speech delays, learning disabilities or both, and were unable to progress
academically. One mother reported that “her foster child had been suspended 17 times
between third and fifth grades and was not retained when he failed all subjects in sixth
grade” (Zetlin et. al., p. 250). Another parent, who cared for a 12-year-old boy, was
25
trying to get him certified as emotionally disturbed so he could have an IEP. He had
recently been expelled for taking a pocketknife to school and had a history of lying,
stealing, and taking street drugs. The foster mother felt he needed "counseling and
modifications in class, and time out." Although he had been diagnosed with social
anxiety disorder and took the antidepressant Zoloft, the school insisted he did not qualify
for special education services because he performed only slightly below grade level on
achievement tests. A third mother described having to fight the school when they tried to
"cancel her foster daughter's IEP" because of too many absences (she ran away
frequently). If the school had had its way, funding would have ceased for the adolescent's
day treatment program and psychological services provided in school and at home (Zetlin
et. al., p. 250). Other themes from the caregivers included generic school complaints:
school counselors were unhelpful, schools denying IEPs, etc., social worker over load:
many of the foster parents felt solely responsible for advocating for their foster child due
to social worker’s case loads being overly demanding, losing services if adopting their
foster child: a big concern among participants in both focus groups was the lack of
services available to caregivers who adopt their foster children. Adoptive parents have
far fewer services available to them then when the child was in foster care (Zetlin et al.,
p. 250-251).
One of the School Liaison’s focus group themes was school stability: liaisons
recognize that the most serious problem for students in foster care is the lack of stability
in their lives. Their homes change, their social workers change, and their school and all
the related connections related change. Another theme was teamwork with the home:
26
the school liaisons felt that a strong home-school partnership was a critical missing part
in dealing with students in foster care. Several school liaisons commented that foster
children’s problems frequently escalate because caregivers do not show up to school
meetings convened when learning or behavior troubles first appear. Liaisons report that
schools cannot rely on caregivers to send the children to school each day or ensure that
they come prepared to learn. Teamwork with Child Welfare was another theme that
occurred.
According to the school liaisons, schools are in the dark as to which of their
students are in foster care. They are also not informed when students are moved and
need to be dis-enrolled. Liaisons report that social workers do not respond when
messages are left by school staff regarding the foster child or parent. Several school
liaisons complained that Child Welfare is reluctant to share any information about the
child—whether he or she is even in the system or who holds education rights.
The last theme within the school liaisons’ focus group is the actual needs of the
foster youth. The liaisons described a multitude of problems that students in foster care
experience in the school setting. Academically, they often have learning gaps that lead to
a referral to special education. Participants felt these gaps were more the result of
frequent school changes and difficulty retaining information (due to emotional trauma)
than a learning disability. Poor attendance and emotional and behavioral problems were
also common among this population. Foster youths may suddenly cry in class or act out.
Principals and deans do not appear to be understanding according to the participants in
this study. They are “ready to kick out any student with a behavior problem or move
27
them to another school. That’s exactly the opposite of what these kids need” (Zetlin et.
al., p. 252).
The first them of the agency advocates focus group was the needs of the foster
youth. A big concern among the agency liaisons is that the students in foster care go
“unnoticed and unassessed”. Their extreme needs go unserved because few in child
welfare are aware of or understand their problems. When the children finally start
exhibiting problems, suddenly child welfare and the schools pay attention to the child.
Because there is little prevention or early intervention work at the school or by child
welfare, when problems do arise the child is referred to special education just to “get
them out of the school”. Finally, the agency liaisons want to see a major shift in
attitudes toward foster children among all the groups. Social workers need to stop saying
"it's the school's responsibility—that’s not my responsibility." The schools need to stop
pointing fingers at the CW agency and the home. As one agency liaison strongly asserted,
"I feel like everybody needs to take responsibility for these kids and really honor that
they belong to all of us” (Zetlin et. al., p. 254).
All three sets of participants recognized that students in foster care experience
serious academic, social, and behavioral problems in the school setting and that much
more needs to be done to address these considerable challenges. As foster children
experienced troubles in school, all three groups looked to their own entity to deal with
problems; there was no collaboration, no team approach, and no shared view on how and
what was needed. All participants agreed that unattended problems continued to escalate
and that some "school" problems threatened the stability of home placements. Each
28
group, however, saw the other groups as needing to play a bigger a role and work more
collaboratively to develop mutually supportive and responsive practices to address
barriers to school success for foster students. Although the participants across focus
group sessions shared a similar goal--the improvement of educational prospects for
children in foster care--each group saw the problems and needs of this high-risk
population from very different perspectives (Zetlin et. al., p. 254).
Discrimination Due to Labels
Foster children may have special needs, but specifically identifying them can
stigmatize children. In a study conducted by The Center for Social Services Research out
of Berkeley, CA (2001), educators in the study reported that systematic labeling may
mean that foster children could be perceived differently, and they should have the same
opportunities as other children. However, results revealed that schools, for various
reasons, sometimes stigmatize foster children. Foster children are often a transitory group
who may be coming from other counties and districts. Additionally, foster children are
often missing an identified “parent” to sign for services and act as a contact person or
advocate. Because of these reasons, according to educators who participated in the 2001
survey, schools may be resistant to invest the same time and energy on a student who
may move in a few weeks compared to students who live with their biological families in
the neighborhood.
Another aspect of identifying foster children in schools concerns the expenditure
of resources on them. Since foster children may be moved to a new school far from their
original home, they may be perceived as being the financial responsibility of another
29
district (even though the district that currently has the children legally is fiscally
responsible for their education). Many participants expressed discomfort pertaining to
situations in which a new district receives many foster children due to the presence of a
group home or increased numbers of foster families. One educator in the study said,
“These are not our kids” (Center for Social Services Research, 2001, pgs 50-51).
Susan Kools (1997) performed a study with adolescents ages 12-19 who have
been in long term foster care for two or more years. Her sample size was of 17 youth
living in a group home setting while having previous experience living in a foster home.
The average number of placements that each child had experienced was four. The
average stay in the foster care system was 5.7 years and ranged from 2-11 years. Kools
gathered her data through intensive interviews, observations in the group home setting,
and analysis of case records. Her study found that children within the system were not
fond, or proud, of their status of “foster child” because they felt as though that label
meant abnormal or damaged. Biased perceptions associated with being a foster child
extend beyond just the foster care setting. The children in the study perceived that
negative stereotypes of “delinquent” or “psychologically impaired” were widely held and
applied to them by those in their social environments. The youth in this study reported
feeling stigmatized based on their label of “foster child”. The respondents reported
feelings of inferiority and shame based on the label and stigma of what mainstream
society feels a foster child is like. Kool’s study also found that the adolescents in the
study went through a process of devaluation of self. The youth perceive and may adopt a
self-definition and behavioral expectations prescribed by others – the thought, “I am who
30
others think I am and I will behave accordingly” (Kools, p. 267). Given these
stereotypes, the adolescents in this study felt as if they were expected to behave within
the parameters of the labels given to them and treated accordingly. These children felt
abnormal and inferior based on their “foster child” status among their peers. Participants
of the study reported being ridiculed and were teased frequently (Kools, p. 266).
In a 2001 qualitative study, foster youth were asked how they felt the label “foster
child” has impacted how others view them. One participant in this study responded that
some individuals “have the wrong idea about children and young adults in the foster care
system. Most people feel that the youth in foster care are troubled, hardened, aggressive,
delinquent, irresponsible, and, in some aspects, dangerous. There are more youth in
foster care who are hardworking, dedicated, and determined, but because of stereotypes
they go unnoticed” (Dent, 2001).
Because literature on the effects of the label “foster child” specifically, is limited,
looking at mental health labels and the effects of those will be beneficial to look at.
A study was conducted with a sample size of 1,444 which looked at the publics
perceptions of people with a mental health diagnosis. Participants in the study were
given a vignette which described somebody with a mental health diagnosis. Participants
were residing nationwide. This study looked at stereotypes of people with a mental
health diagnosis and according to the researchers a central aspect of the stereotype
“mental illness” is dangerousness (Link, Phelan, Bresnahan, Stueve, & Pescosolido,
1999). This study found that 56% of participants believed those with a mental illness
were to be more dangerous than those without a diagnosis (p. 1330). Participants were
31
also asked social distance questions. Respondents asked how willing they would be to (1
= definitely, 4 = definitely not) (1) move next door to the person depicted in the vignette,
(2) spend an evening socializing with the person, (3) make friends with the person, (4)
start working closely with the person, and (5) have the person marry into the family.
Responses were summed and divided by 5 so that scores could range from 1 (low social
distance) to 4 (high social distance). The results showed that 59.8% of participants
desired a high social distance away from the person with the mental illness label (Link et.
al., p.1331) The conclusion of this study was when the symptoms of mental illnesses are
presented in vignettes, people's fears are dramatically heightened. This occurs even
though there is no mention of violent behavior in the vignettes. These findings lead the
researchers to the conclusion that public fears are out of proportion with reality (p. 1332).
While empirical studies show a modest elevation in violence among people with mental
illnesses, empirical studies of violence uniformly show that only a minority of people
with mental illnesses are violent (p. 1332). Because of the negative stigma that comes
with the label of a mental health diagnosis, this study found that people wanted to stay
away from those with the label and wanted little interaction because of their fear that the
diagnosed person will be violent (p. 1333).
In another study, youth were asked about their peers with different labels of
depression or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study used a
national sample of children ages 8 to 18 and examined variation in the level of stigma.
Surveys were administered to 1,318 children and adolescents. Respondents were
randomly assigned to depression, ADHD, or asthma conditions and were presented with a
32
vignette about a peer with one of the conditions. Participants responded to items
assessing positive and negative attributions, social distance, and family attitudes. Mean
differences were tested for statistical significance and effect sizes were computed. This
study found that respondents were more likely to make negative attributions about peers
with ADHD and depression versus asthma, particularly regarding the likelihood of
antisocial behavior and violence. Moderate effect sizes were found for preferences for
social distance from peers with ADHD (d = 0.37) and depression (d = 0.45). Effects were
found for perceptions of negative family attitudes toward both mental health conditions,
with depression (d = 0.78) seen as even more stigmatized than ADHD (d = 0.47). The
level of stigmatization was relatively constant across demographic variables, with the
exception of greater stigmatization evident in Asian/Pacific Islander youths (Walker,
Coleman, Lee, Squire, & Friesen, 2008). The perception of likelihood of violence and
antisocial behavior was particularly high for both ADHD and depression, greatly
exceeding the real-world association for depression (Walker et. al, 2008).
Gaps in the Literature
Many of the studies cited within the literature review were with children or
adolescents that grew up in many different foster homes as opposed to growing up with
one or two stable foster families, therefore the views of all foster children may not be the
same as those within the studies. There is also the question as to how accurate the
accounts of some of the children’s stories are because the adult figure is seen as an
authority figure, the children may have answered questions differently because they
wanted to please the interviewer. Other gaps in the literature are how some of the
33
interviews or surveys were conducted, most of which were in person or over the phone,
and the information is limited to self-reporting. The children within the studies were also
removed from their homes due to abuse or neglect and did not include children who were
placed into the system due to death of biological parents or death of guardians that were
previously taking care of the children. While every child is unique, some of the studies
generalized the population. It was also noted that the counselor did many of the
qualitative interviews in therapy sessions. If research interviews are conducted during
the process of therapy, there can tend to be an interactive affect between the research and
the therapy and may skew results.
Adults that were interviewed may have a bias that they did not disclose or
answered questions with how they felt they should instead of how they would due to
wanting to “people please” the interviewer.
There were also a limited number of articles/studies that actually looked at how
teachers treat children differently due to their labels, which is a focus of this study.
Summary
This section discussed the historical background of the foster care system,
different viewpoints of the foster care system, the affects of abuse and neglect on children
living in the foster care system, educational affects due to being in foster care, the
discrimination that occurs due to labels that are given to foster youth, and gaps that are in
the literature.
34
Chapter 3
METHODS
The following chapter will discuss the methodology and design for collecting data
and for data analysis of this study. This chapter will also cover the participants in the
study, procedures of the study, and the protection of human subjects.
Design
This study is a qualitative, exploratory study of the participants’ experiences.
Qualitative research aims to gather an in-depth understanding of human behavior and the
reasons that govern such behavior. The qualitative method investigates the why and how
of decision making instead of the what, where, when commonly found in quantitative
studies. Hence, smaller but focused samples are more often needed, rather than large
samples (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). Qualitative research approaches have the advantage
of allowing for more diversity in responses as well as the capacity to adapt to new
developments or issues during the research process itself (Holliday, 2002). By gathering
qualitative data instead of quantitative, this researcher was provided with a better
understanding of why each participant responded in the manner that they did.
Participants were able to tell this researcher a story of their perceptions and ideas instead
of fitting their answers into certain categories within a questionnaire.
Research Question
The primary research question that guided this study is “Does the label foster
child have an impact on how foster youth are treated by their teachers?” To obtain
knowledge and understanding of this question, this researcher asked participants a variety
35
of questions. Questions included: 1) To your knowledge, how many of your students
have been in the foster care system? Do you know who is a foster child and if so, how do
you know this? 2) What was your experience with these particular students? 3) When
teachers, such as yourself, hear the word “foster child”, what comes to your mind? 4) Do
you feel your students who are in foster care are treated differently than their classmates?
If so, how? 5) What is your experience with foster parents? 6) Do you have any
experience with foster youth outside of the classroom? 7) What are your views of the
foster care system? 8) Is there anything else you would like to add about foster children
and the educational system?
Data Analysis
This researcher conducted eight interviews, which were all audio taped. This
researcher played each interview back and transcribed all of the interviews. After
transcribing, this researcher began the process of coding, which is commonly found in
grounding theory. This is often used when analyzing qualitative data (Glaser, 1992).
This researcher began with open coding the transcriptions. This researcher
conceptualized the transcriptions line by line, which resulted in many different concepts.
After open coding, this researcher moved on to selective coding. During selective
coding, this researcher examined common themes and concepts that emerged from each
of the transcribed interviews by examining the open coding. After organizing common
concepts, this researcher began to memo and sort key ideas together to develop main
ideas based on similar ideas that the participants expressed in each of their own
interviews.
36
The sorting of the themes gave this researcher data that will be used as the
findings of this study.
Participants
Participants of this study included eight teachers from the Solano County area
with varying levels of experience. Participants taught in classrooms ranging from
elementary school to high school. Recruitment occurred using a snowball sampling
method. This researcher informed a previous teacher about the study and the teacher was
interested and indicated that many others would also be interested in participating in the
study. This researcher provided the initial teacher with contact information so that other
interested teachers could contact this researcher.
Procedures
Participants of this study contacted this researcher to indicate that they were
interested in being interviewed. After the initial contact, this researcher and the
participant agreed upon a location and time that was convenient and allowed for a
confidential interview to occur. The participant was provided a consent form before the
interview took place.
This researcher asked the participant a series of questions and audio taped the
participant’s responses. Each interview lasted between 45 minutes to one hour. Once the
interview was complete, this researcher began the transcription process.
Protection of Human Subjects
Participants were provided with an informed consent form that explained the
purpose of the study. After signing a copy and returning it to this researcher, the
37
participants were provided with a copy of their own to keep. Participants were told that
the study was completely voluntary and that there were no negative consequences for not
completing the study. Participants were also informed that they could stop the interview
at any time and that they could choose not to answer any questions. Participants’ names
were kept confidential and there was no way of connecting the participants to their
responses. Interview tapes were stored in a locked cabinet. This researcher had the only
key and the only access to these tapes. All interview tapes were destroyed after
completion of study.
The Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects from the Division of Social
Work approved this study as no risk. The human subjects approval number is 10-11-054.
38
Chapter 4
FINDINGS
Participant Demographics
The following data were collected through interviews with eight participants. All
participants were teachers within Solano County. The participants had varying levels of
experience.
Participant 1 has been teaching for 24 years in a middle school setting and is
currently teaching the 8th grade. He teaches at a middle school in Green Valley, CA and
is 52 years old.
Participant 2 has been teaching for 3 years in the elementary school setting. She
is currently teaching 3rd grade. She teaches at an elementary school in Vacaville, CA and
is 27 years old.
Participant 3 has been teaching for 2 years with one-year experience as a student
teacher. She has taught Kindergarten, 2nd, and 6th grades. She is currently teaching 1st
grade. She teaches at an elementary school in Fairfield, CA and is 26 years old.
Participant 4 has been teaching for 16 years in the elementary school setting. She
has previously taught 2nd, 4th, 5th, and is currently teaching the 6th grade. She teaches at
an elementary school in Vacaville, CA and is 42 years old.
Participant 5 has been teaching for 7 years in the high school setting. He is
currently teaching 10th and 11th grade and has previously taught 9th and 12th grade as well.
He teaches at a high school in Fairfield, CA and is 36 years old.
39
Participant 6 has been teaching for 37 years in the middle school setting. He is
currently retired and previously taught 7th and 8th grades. He taught in Vacaville,
Fairfield, and Vallejo, CA and is 63 years old.
Participant 7 has been teaching for 1 year in the elementary school setting. She is
currently teaching 1st grade. She teaches at an elementary school in Dixon, CA and is 25
years old.
Participant 8 has been teaching for 19 years in the high school setting. He is
currently teaching 9th-12th grades at a high school in Fairfield, CA. He is 53 years old.
After interviewing all eight participants, this researcher transcribed and coded the
interviews. Coding allowed this researcher to discover themes that emerged among all
eight participants. The themes that emerged were: the discovery of a foster child’s status
only when there were behavioral problems present, how being informed of the child’s
status beforehand would be helpful to form certain expectations, opinions of the foster
care system and foster parents, and a lack of training or education on foster youth prior to
becoming teachers.
Themes
Discovery of a foster child’s status
One of the themes among the participants was that the discovery of a foster
child’s status of being within the system only occurred when there were previous
behavioral problems. All eight participants shared that the only time they have been
informed that a child is in the foster care system is when these behavioral problems
escalated and the teachers were involved in an IEP or when the parents need to be called.
40
That is when they discover a child is a foster youth by reviewing the child’s records.
Participant 1 stated:
When I have a problem with a kid in one of my classes we call either a
meeting with the parents or an IEP. We look at the chart of the student to see
if there has been any other disciplinary action taken against the student.
Usually once I look at the student’s chart I see that they have jumped around
to different schools or that their parents are actually foster parents. With every
student I have had that was a foster kid, at least that I know of, it has been under
these circumstances. We aren’t told ahead of time that maybe that child needs
extra services or that they come from a rough home life, we find out after they are
causing problems in the classroom.
Participant 6 described very similarly how they find out a child is in the foster
care system. “When a student is acting out in class and causing problems, I will pull out
their chart. That’s when I will typically find out that the student is a foster child”. All
participants of the study agreed that when a child is in their class, they are not informed
by the administration or by the foster parents until the behaviors exhibited by the student
become overwhelming for the teachers.
Being informed of a child’s status and expectations
All eight participants were in agreement that they think it would be helpful to be
informed if a child is in the system. The participants thought this would be helpful so
that they could have a better understanding of the child and they may go about teaching
them differently, or their expectations would be different from a child who is living at
41
home with their biological parents. While all eight participants stated that they thought it
would be helpful to know beforehand, the reasons why they thought it would be helpful
varied. Participant 8 stated:
If I was informed that a child is in foster care before they enter my classroom, I
might have different expectations of them. I wouldn’t expect them to do as
well because chances are they have jumped from school to school so they are
probably farther behind in their education. I would also be prepared by
knowing that they are probably going to be troublemakers. I know that sounds
bad, but from my experience, kids who are in foster care act out a lot in class and
are troublemakers. I also never know how long the student is going to be in my
class, let alone the school. Those kids get jumped from home to home quite often.
They could be here one week and gone the next. I don’t mean to sound harsh, but
I don’t think it’s fair for the other students in my class to miss out on their
education because more of my energy is going to a student who is already so far
behind.
Some of the other participants in the study agreed that foster youth may be “more
difficult to handle” in the classroom and it would be a good idea to know a head of time
if a child is in the system or not so that they can be prepared. Three participants felt this
way and described other teachers feeling similar to participant 8. These participants
described fellow teachers and co-workers who had the mentality that foster children have
little chance at receiving a proper education if they do not have one stable home.
42
Participant 2 stated, “foster kids are already so far behind in their education it’s
almost unrealistic to think that they will be able to catch up”. The other four participants
felt it would be helpful to be informed of a child’s foster care status so that they can be
more sensitive to the needs of the child. Understanding that the foster youth is facing
many other challenges in their home life that they will need extra services to prevent the
behavioral problems that tend to occur in the participant’s experiences. The participants
with this belief also had different expectations of foster youth then children living with
their biological parents, but their expectations weren’t necessarily lower or with the belief
that the foster youth have no hope. Participant 1 stated:
These kids already have so much going on in their lives. I can’t really expect
them to write a perfect book report or give an A+ presentation when I know
that they are going to court or they are having to pack up their belongings to
be sent to yet another foster home and learn to live with yet another family. I
can’t expect that of them. That doesn’t mean I let them get away without doing
any work though. They are just as smart as their classmates and they have the
same potential. Unfortunately they probably aren’t even aware that they have
potential because nobody has ever told them before. I think it would be extremely
beneficial to know about a foster kids situation in the classroom so that I can
provide them with any extra help that they need or to support them in any way
that I can. Yeah, they may end up leaving in a week, a month, who knows, but if
I can support them for that week, or that month then that’s what I will do.
43
Participant 7 stated:
Foster kids need all the extra help that they can get. If they aren’t getting it
at home and they don’t get it at school, where do people expect them to get
it? Schools should be informed if a child needs extra services and they should
be taken advantage of before it becomes a problem, before the child starts acting
out and then they decide to do something which usually is some sort of
disciplinary action. I don’t think that’s a very supportive message for a child. If
you act up, then you’ll get attention, as opposed to you might need a little extra
help, let me support you. That’s the way it should be.
This group of participants felt like they should be made aware of whether a
student is a foster child or not so that they could provide extra support and possibly teach
those students in a more effective manner. While they all have prior experience that
foster youth may be more difficult in the classroom and they may be more prone to
behavioral problems, these four participants looked at the foster youth with more of a
strength based perspective than the other four participants. The participants of the study
not only all agreed that they should be informed when a student of theirs is in the foster
care system, they all claimed to not have much knowledge about the foster care system
itself. The only exposure that they had was with the foster parents themselves.
Views of the foster care system and foster parents
This researcher asked all participants their opinions on the foster care system.
The participants all stated that they did not know enough about the foster care system to
really have a developed opinion. While all of the participants had no real exposure to the
44
foster care system itself, they all had some experience or some belief about the foster
parents they have conversed with of the children in their classrooms. Participant 4 stated:
Of course it depends on the child, but from my experience, the foster parents
haven’t always been the easiest to get a hold of. If a child is having some
difficulty in class, I will try to speak to the parent before things get out of hand.
In most cases, the foster parents are the most difficult to get a hold of. I don’t
know if it’s because they are so busy with their other foster children or if they
aren’t being supportive at home, I don’t want to assume anything. Sometimes
it gets to the point where I don’t even bother anymore because I know that the
foster parent isn’t going to call me back.
Many of the other participants felt the same way, that many of the foster parents weren’t
being as supportive as their other student’s parents. “I’ll send stuff home and it is never
returned. If we go on a field trip that requires money, sadly I’ve noticed that the
children’s foster parents won’t pay for their child to go. I don’t want to generalize,
because I’m sure there are some supportive foster parents out there, that just hasn’t been
my experience with the foster children I’ve had over the years”, participant 1 stated.
Participants do not have much experience with the foster care system itself, if at all.
Foster parents are the only experience that they have had with the system, and majority of
the participants interviewed claim that it has not always been a positive experience for
them. Six of the eight participants have not had very positive experiences when it comes
to their time with foster parents. All participants of the study where unaware that they
could speak to the foster child’s social worker or how they would go about speaking to
45
the child’s social worker. Participants had a lack of knowledge of the foster care system
and its inner workings and all of the participants also vocalized that they did not receive
training during their own education about how to work with foster youth.
Lack of education or training on foster youth
When each of the participants were pursuing their education to become teachers,
learning about children in foster care and their behaviors was not part of the curriculum.
“We never learned that foster kids might have a more difficult time learning than their
classmates. Many teachers don’t understand what moving around from home to home
can do to a kid. How can we really expect them to sit still and do their work quietly
when they have so much going on in their heads? Of course it would be difficult to focus
at times, I know I would have difficulty focusing”, stated participant 1.
Participant 7 stated:
It isn’t part of our curriculum to learn while we were in school to become
teachers; at least it wasn’t for me. It is something that is really important
though, I think. How can we learn to become better teachers for these kids?
I think that it’s our responsibility to seek outside instruction, attend a
training or two, just to become more knowledgeable. If it’s up to the
individual teacher though, I’m afraid it won’t be done. I think it should be
part of a requirement that we learn how we can better serve these kids and how
their home lives are going to play a part in how they act in school. Having extra
knowledge about their behavioral issues or learning more about the foster care
system can only be beneficial.
46
Six of the eight participants felt that learning more about the foster care system
would be beneficial when teaching. They felt that understanding more about the system
would help them understand more about the child. Learning why a child enters the
system, how long they are in the system for, learning more about the role of a social
worker would allow them to work as part of a team to support the child. These
participants also felt that learning about attachment disorders and conduct disorders in
relation to children living in foster care would allow them to better understand a child’s
behavior and how to respond appropriately, instead of using the same disciplinary actions
with every student in their classroom. These six participants all agreed that if they were
informed of a training on educating foster children, they would attend. They also agreed
that making it part of the learning curriculum while attending school to get their
credentials would be beneficial to future teachers.
The other two participants in the study did not think that any further training
should be required. “I discipline and teach each child the same. I don’t think it would be
fair for one student to get treated differently. I understand that transitions at home may
be difficult, but I don’t see how any extra training on my part would be beneficial. We
aren’t dummies, we know what to do when a kid is acting up”, participant 8 stated.
These participants did not think that any further training would be beneficial or helpful.
Summary
After interviewing the eight participants, it appears that teachers may view and
treat foster children differently than other children. Based on the label “foster child”,
there are certain expectations and assumptions being made that can be of negative
47
consequence to the child in foster care. Because the participants in the study were only
made aware of a child’s foster care status if there was a behavioral problem, the
participants may have had numerous positive experiences with foster children, but were
unaware that these children may have also been foster children because of the lack of
educational or behavioral problems. Based on the study findings, it appears that teachers
are not trained or taught how to interact with foster children, and that the way the
teachers are informed of their foster status is when there is already a behavioral problem
in the classroom. The majority of the participant’s experiences with foster parents have
been negative and there is lack of knowledge about the foster care system itself. The
majority of the participants believe that a better understanding and extra training or
teaching would be helpful to better understand foster children and why they may behave
the way they do, and as educators what they could do differently to help the foster youth
in the classroom.
48
Chapter 5
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL WORK
This chapter reviews the findings and describes the relevance of the findings.
Implications of the study are also discussed which includes how the findings contribute to
the field of social work. It also describes problems or setbacks that were encountered,
along with suggestions for future research to improve this area of study.
Review of Findings and Relevance
The main findings of the research were revealed in the themes that emerged from
the interviews. A common theme was that educators were unaware if their student was in
the foster care system upon entering their classroom. Participants found out if a child
was in the foster care system when a behavioral problem occurred and they then looked
at the student’s chart. They were never notified of the child’s status beforehand.
Participants described not having much knowledge of the foster care system. The
participants’ main contact or knowledge of foster care was their interaction with the
foster parents. This study revealed that this interaction between the participants and the
foster parents was not always productive. Their experiences were that foster parents were
not as involved in their child’s education or that they were difficult to get a hold of. In
fact, some participants seemed to question the commitment of the foster parents to the
child’s educational development. The majority of the participants believed that further
education and training about how to better educate foster youth would benefit not only
the youth, but the educators as well. It would benefit the youth because their teachers
would understand their needs more, which would benefit them in the classroom with
49
different teaching styles. It would benefit them socially in the classroom as well because
the teachers would be better informed on how to discipline and what is appropriate.
Further training would benefit the educators themselves because they might feel more in
control of their classroom and wouldn’t feel as if they were at a loss with what to do with
a foster youth.
One of the more important findings was that participants acknowledged having
preconceived ideas about how foster youth would act in their classroom. Participants
stated that foster youth tended to be “trouble makers” and that they were more difficult to
have in the classroom. The majority of the participants had sympathy towards foster
youth, but they also had negative perceptions of them based on the label of foster child.
When participants heard the label, “foster child”, they felt as if they already knew how
that child was going to act based on their past experiences with former students that were
also foster youth. Some participants may also have an idea of how they are going to treat
or educate the child. Some of the participants realized that teaching a foster youth is
more of a challenge because the child may be behind in school because of numerous
transfers or because of behavior problems but they would like to see the student succeed.
Other participants felt that a foster youth may transfer at any moment and that they were
so far behind educationally that the student is a “lost cause”. Therefore, the teacher
might not put as much effort into educating that child as he/she would with a different
student in their classroom.
These findings are congruent with those in a similar study (Zetlin et al., 2006) that
addressed the educational needs of foster youth. This study found that caregivers had a
50
difficult time getting schools to acknowledge the foster youth’s needs for extra services
to address their behavioral and learning problems. Caregivers also perceived that
children in foster care got into trouble for things that were similar to their classmates, but
their classmates did not receive punishment. In the same study, schools reported that
caregivers were not supportive and did not attend school meetings or respond when a
behavior first appeared. According to school liaisons, schools were left in the dark as to
which students are in foster care and they were not informed when students moved.
Principals and deans did not appear to understand the problems of foster children and
were ready to kick out any student with a behavior problem. All participants recognized
that students in foster care experience serious academic, social, and behavioral problems
in the school setting and that much more needs to be done to address these considerable
challenges (Zetlin et. al.,)
A 2001 study (The Center for Social Services Research) also found similar
discrimination. This study described the discrimination that foster youth experience due
to labels. Educators in the study reported that systematic labeling may mean that foster
children are perceived differently. Results revealed that schools may stigmatize foster
children. Foster children are often seen as a transitory group and because of this, schools
may be resistant to invest the same time and energy on a student who may move in a few
weeks compared to students who live with their biological families in the neighborhood
(The Center for Social Services Research).
Another study (Kools, 1997) found that children within the system were not fond
or proud of their status of “foster child”. These children perceived that negative
51
stereotypes of “delinquent” or “psychologically impaired” were applied to them. The
youth in this study reported feeling stigmatized and judged based on their label “foster
child”. Adolescents in the study felt that they were expected to behave within the
parameters of the labels given to them and were treated accordingly. These children felt
inferior based on their “foster child” status among their peers and reported being teased
frequently at school (Kools).
These findings are also congruent with labeling theory and how a label can cause
people to be treated differently based solely on the label. Those who are labeled will then
in turn feel the need to fulfill the labels that have been given to them, even if those labels
are assumptions (Becker, 1963). Statuses or labels have one key trait, which is to
distinguish who belongs from those who do not (Hughes, 1945). Possession of one
undesirable trait may have a generalized symbolic value, so that people automatically
assume that its bearer possess other negative traits allegedly associated with it. The
status of deviant, troublemaker, or bad kid is a master status that will follow that student
(Hughes, 1945). This is congruent with how a foster child receives a certain label and
people assume that child possesses the negative traits or behaviors that are similar to
another student with the same label of “foster child”.
Implications
Social workers can utilize the findings in this study in a number of ways. Social
workers or school counselors can arrange trainings for educators to help them become
aware of what being in an out-of-home-placement may do to a child’s development and
how this affects them in the classroom. Educators may have to teach foster youth
52
differently and give them different consequences than some of their other students. A
training on the foster care system itself could also be beneficial to teachers to help them
understand the workings of the system, whom they can talk to about the child’s
education, and what resources they have such as social workers.
This study can also bring awareness to how labeling can affect a child in the
educational system and how they may not be obtaining the extra services that are
necessary for them to receive a proper education. This study supports the idea that some
teachers may not put as much effort into teaching a foster youth because they are unsure
how long the child is going to be in the classroom. This type of thinking can be
extremely detrimental to a child’s education. Social workers can become aware that
foster youth can be stereotyped and that they may need to advocate for extra services for
them within the school setting. Social Workers within the foster care system should work
closely with the schools to help educate teachers and principals about the special needs of
children in foster care and extra services that students may require to further their
education.
One drawback of this study is that all participants may not have been as honest
with this researcher because the participants may not have wanted to be seen in a
negative light. While a qualitative study was extremely useful to inspect themes and to
have a narrative of each of the participant’s experiences, conducting a quantitative study,
such as a survey, may result in different answers due to the anonymity of participants. A
quantitative study would also allow for more participants working with a broader
population of students to participate.
53
Recommendation for Future Research
Further research that could build upon this study would be to interview school
social workers or foster agency social workers to see what is being done by them to help
promote a healthy learning environment for foster youth and to see if they are aware of
the discrimination due to labeling that is occurring within the schools. It would also be
beneficial to do further research on the foster youth themselves to see what struggles or
difficulties they are having in the schools and to understand their perceptions of how they
are treated. Further research could also be broadened to interviewing principals, school
counselors, and foster parents.
Summary
This study was a qualitative study with eight participants; all were educators
teaching a classroom of students and had some experience with foster youth in their
classes. These participants were interviewed about their experiences with foster youth
and asked what they thought of when they heard the term “foster child.” This researcher
wanted to know if teachers treated foster youth differently based on the label “foster child
or had preconceived ideas or stereotypes regarding foster youth. Findings of the study
were that educators had an overall negative view of foster youth. This could be due to
the fact that educators are unaware of a child’s status of being in the foster care system
until a behavioral problem has occurred. Thus, foster child and behavior problems
become synonymous. Teachers come to expect all foster youth to behave poorly
because they are only aware of foster students who cause disruptions. Participants in the
54
study may have other foster youth in their classroom, but were unaware of their status
simply because these foster youth evidence no behavioral problems. Many foster children
may excel academically or demonstrate resilience. The teacher, however, remains
unaware that these “good students” are also foster youth.
This study also revealed that there is little training or education about foster youth
or the foster care system given to educators. , The majority of participants stated that
they would find it helpful to have a better understanding of foster youth and/or the
system.
It is hoped that this study will bring awareness to the discrimination that is
occurring within schools against foster youth and how the label of foster child can
negatively affect a child’s education.
55
REFERENCES
Adoption Library (2011). Group Home. Retrieved from
http://glossary.adoption.com/group-home.html
Altshuler, S. (1997) A reveille for school social workers: children in foster care need
our help! Social Work in Education 19(2) 121-127.
Barth, R., Chapman, M., & Wall, A. (2004). Children’s voices: The perceptions of
children in foster care. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 293-304.
Bay Area Social Services Consortium Center for Social Services Research (2001).
Education for Foster Children: Removing Barriers to Academic Success.
Berkeley.
Becker, H., (1963). Labeling theory. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance.
New York: The Free Press.
Center for Child and Family Studies (2005). Glossary. Retrieved from
http://www.cpin.us/p/pel/glossary.htm
Child Information Gateway (2010). Foster Care Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/foster.cfm
Child Information Gateway (2008). Long-Term Consequences of Child Abuse and
Neglect. Retrieved from
56
http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/long_term_consequences.cfm
#psych
Coady,.F., Fine, & Palmer., (2001). Service participant voices in child welfare,
children’s mental health, and psychotherapy. Partnerships for Children and
Families Project, 6-89.
Cohen, A., & Short, F., (1961). Juvenile Delinquency. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and
World.
Curtis, P. D. (1999). The Foster Care Crisis. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.
Delaney, R. &. Kunstal, F. (1993). Troubled Transplants. Oklahoma City: Wood 'N
Barnes.
Delaney, R. (1998). Fostering Changes. Oklahoma City: Wood 'N' Barnes.
Dent, V. (2001). Don’t prejudge teens in care. Retrieved from
http://www.connectforkids.org/node/317
Denzin, N & Lincoln, S. (2005). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dubner, A. & Motta, R. (1999). Sexually and physically abused foster care children
and posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology , 367-373.
57
Festinger, T. (1983). No one ever asked us. A postscript to foster care. New York:
Columbia Press.
Fox, M. & Arcuri, K. (1980). Cognitive and academic functioning in foster children.
Child Welfare, 79, 491-496.
Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology
Press.
Herman, E. (2007). Fostering and Foster Care. Retrieved 2010, from The Adoption
History Project: http://www.uoregon.edu/~adoption/topics/fostering.htm
Holliday, A. R. (2002). Doing and Writing Qualitative Research, 2nd Edition. London:
Sage Publications.
Howard, S., (2006). Attitudes Towards Foster Care. Retrieved August 2010, from
http://www.kon.org/urc/v6/howard
Hughes, C., (1945). Dilemmas and contradictions of status. American Journal of
Sociology, 353-359.
Kilpatrick, D. R. (2003). Violence and risk of PTSD, major depression, substance
abuse/dependence, and comorbidity: Results from the national survery of
adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71 , 692-700.
Kools, S. (1997). Adolescent identity development in foster care. Family Relations,
46(3), 263-271.
58
Link, B., Phelan, J, Bresnahan,M., Stueve, A., & Pescosolido, B (1999). Public
conceptions of mental illness: labels, causes, dangerousness, and social
distance. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1328-1333.
Mash, E. & Wolfe, D. (2003). Abnormal Child Psychology. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Merriam-Webster (2011). Dictionary. http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary
McKellar, N. (2007). Foster care for children: information for teachers. NASP
Communique 36(4).
National Association of Social Workers (2008), Code of Ethics. Retrieved from
http://www.naswdc.org/pubs/code/code.asp
National Foster Parent Association (2010). History of Foster Care in the United
States.
(2010). Retrieved from
http://www.nfpainc.org/content/?page=HISTORYOFFOSTERCARE
Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care (2003), Results of a National Survey of
Voters. Retrieved from http://pewfostercare.org/docs/index.php?DocID=21
Plummer, K. (2008). Labeling Theory In Volume 1: Historical, conceptual, and
theoretical ideas. Retrieved from
http://www.sjsu.edu/upload/course/course_1518/ajreading10labeling.pdf
Silverman, A. R. (1996). The long-term sequelae of child and adolescent abuse: A
longitudinal community study. Child Abuse and Neglect 20(8) , 709-723.
59
Springer, K. W. (2007). Long-term physical and mental health consequences of
childhood physical abuse: Results from a large population-based sample of
men and women. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31 , 517-530.
United States Department of Labor (2005). Social Worker. Retrieved from
http://www.bls.gov/k12/help05.htm
Walker, J., Coleman, D., Lee, J., Squire, M., & Friesen, B. (2008). Children’s
stigmatization of childhood depression and adhd. Journal of the American
Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 47(8), 912-920.
Zetlin, A., Weinber, L., & Shea, N. (2010). Caregivers, school liaisons, and agency
advocates speak out about the educational needs of children and youths in foster
care. Social Work, 55(3), 245-254.