Rural pupils in poverty perform better

More educational support at home and less time hanging out with friends or online could be reasons why rural children’s education is not as affected by poverty, as those living in towns and cities.

The findings emerged from research into why pupils of rural primary schools supported by a Department of Education programme to tackle disadvantage do significantly better in reading and maths than those at urban schools in the same scheme.

The performance trend that has emerged in various reports was investigated by Susan Weir and Darina Errity of the Educational Research Centre in Dublin and Laura McAvinue from University of Limerick’s psychology department.

They identified a stronger emphasis on education in rural homes, where more surveyed parents reported reading themselves or with their children, and had higher education levels than urban parents, factors linked by previous research to better school performance.

The authors of the study in The Irish Journal of Education also found differences in how children used their free time, with those in rural areas spending less time hanging out with friends and playing computer games after school. They were also less likely to be members of online communities, youth clubs, scouts, guides or other such organisations.

While these issues may be linked to practical issues like distance from friends or facilities, and poorer internet access in rural areas, the researchers say they may partly explain the stronger school performance of rural pupils.

They said their likelihood of spending more time at home, and less time online, playing computer games or watching TV, means they may have more frequent and meaningful interaction with their parents.

“This may be especially beneficial in the context of a supportive home environment in which education is highly valued and a child is exposed to positive modelling, encouragement and stimulation,” their report states.

Home environment and use of free time were found to be significantly associated with reading and maths achievement, with higher scores among pupils with more access to books or other educational resources at home. Students who spent less time socialising with peers after school, either online or in a youth club or organisation, also had higher achievement in tests.

“In light of this, it seems reasonable to suggest that these factors may at least partially explain the discrepancies often observed between the achievements of students in rural and urban areas of disadvantage,” they wrote.

Not only do pupils of rural schools in the Department of Education’s DEIS (Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools) programme perform better than those in urban DEIS schools, a recent study found they did better in maths than children in non-DEIS rural schools.

The latest research is based on analysis of test scores of more than 6,000 third-class pupils at urban and rural DEIS schools in 2007, and questionnaires administered among 2,300 whose families had medical cards, and to their parents and teachers.

A review of the DEIS programme is examining what factors should be used to decide which schools benefit from its smaller classes and added funding. It supports 850 primary and second-level schools with the highest levels of disadvantage.