Poverty Both Payne (N.D.) and Taylor (N.D.)

Poverty Both Payne (n.d.) and Taylor (n.d.) argue that poverty is institutionalized and embedded in social norms. Payne's (n.d.) model proposes multiple dimensions and manifestations of poverty, especially as it impacts both adult and child education. Poverty is relative, according to Payne, and must be understood within a contextual framework. Moreover, Payne notes that socioeconomic class must be reframed not as a sharp delineation between haves and have-nots, but as a continuum.

Schools and other social institutions not only fail to realize these fundamental factors, but they also operate with a dominant culture framework, using "middle class norms" and the "hidden rules" of the middle class as well (Payne, n.d., p. 2). Payne goes so far as to say that students hoping to achieve upward social mobility sacrifice their relationships for their personal achievement, thereby creating social and psychological problems. However, those relationships are precisely what can cause generational poverty.

Payne deftly differentiates between generational and situational or temporary poverty, as the two present completely different issues for the individual. Generation poverty becomes a worldview, whereas situational poverty represents temporary lack of specific resources, generally financial. Financial resources are not the only part of poverty. In fact, poverty is at its most entrenched and potentially harmful when it entails lack of access to other forms of capital including emotional, mental, and social resources. Taylor (n.d.) likewise discusses poverty from a multidimensional framework.

Although Payne makes some salient points about poverty, some of the observations provided become debilitating logical fallacies. For example, the opening scene in which a student feels aggression towards another student has nothing to do with poverty. Payne (n.d.) proceeds to provide over-generalizations about poor, middle-class, and wealthy people in a chart indicating that wealthy people use lawyers to fight, whereas poor people use violence.

The puerile prejudices embedded in Payne's (n.d.) model threaten to undermine the core arguments, but thankfully, Payne proceeds to provide an intermediary model to help students of all ages develop unique cognitive strategies and frameworks. Taylor (n.d) does well to enhance Payne's (n.d.) argument by building on its more salient and concrete points, while eliminating the logical fallacies. Moreover, Taylor (n.d.) adds the all-important dimensions of race and gender to the discussion of poverty and power.

Eliminating or ignoring the importance of gender and race in the poverty argument defeats the purpose of providing educators with an adequate understanding of poverty's multiple dimensions. Taylor (n.d.) therefore provides a more comprehensive vision for change. Both Payne and Taylor (n.d.) agree on core factors of poverty, especially its complexity and its multidimensionality. Both authors also agree on the complicity of social institutions, whether that complicity is conscious or not.

Payne (n.d.) believes that the "hidden rules" are indeed unconscious, which is why close attention should be paid to the use of language in the classroom. According to Payne, educators need to become more aware of the cognitive structures and frameworks that underlie basic assumptions. As Taylor (n.d.) points out, poverty is "neither simple nor one-dimensional. Poverty is steeped in the historical, political, social, legal, and very personal intersections of multiple dimensions mired in racism and capitalism," (p. 1). Educators who.