Ama Yates-Ekong Senior Thesis (4)

1

Spelman College

“AUC Students Perceptions/Attitudes towards Poverty.”

A Senior Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirements For the B.A. Degree in Sociology / Sociology & Anthropology

Sociology 432 Sociology Thesis

Advisor: Dr. Bruce Wade

Reader: Dr. Daryl White

December 8th, 2014

Submitted by

Ama Yates-Ekong

2

Table of ContentsI. Abstract..........................................................................................................................................................1

II. Statement of the Problem..............................................................................................................................1

III. Literature Review.......................................................................................................................................9

IV. Theory and Research Questions..............................................................................................................14

V. Methodology, Scope and Limitations..........................................................................................................22

a. Research Design...........................................................................................................................................22

b. Interview Schedule.......................................................................................................................................23

c. Sampling Methods and Limitations.............................................................................................................24

VI. Data Analysis............................................................................................................................................25

a. Online Questionnaire...................................................................................................................................25

i. Demographics...............................................................................................................................................25

b. Focus Groups................................................................................................................................................35

c. One on One Interviews................................................................................................................................35

d. How does religiosity and/or spirituality among students influence how they perceive poverty?........36-48

e. How do students respond to specific images and representations of the poor in media?......................45-49

f. How do students rationalize poverty?....................................................................................................50-54

g. What are students’ views concerning social change and action?..........................................................55-60

VII. Findings and Implications...................................................................................................................61-62

VIII. Conclusion and Summary........................................................................................................................63

References............................................................................................................................................................63

Appendix A. Online Questionnaire.......................................................................................................................68

Appendix B. Interview Schedule, Images and Video Link....................................................................................82

1

I. Abstract

This research study analyzed HBCU students’ attitudes and perceptions towards poverty. This study

examines the relationship between ideological views (religious, spiritual and political) and perceptions of those

living in poverty. Additionally, relationships between religiosity, spirituality and attitudes regarding anti poverty

policies and legislation were examined. A mixed methods approach was used to examine student perceptions

which included a 38 item online questionnaire with an 11 item Demographics section. A 17 item Interview

schedule was used for 1 focus group and 7 one on one interviews, which included an additional 7 item Image

Response Section and the analysis of a a documentary about the Working Poor. Additionally, a 7 item religiosity

scale and 4 item spirituality scale was tested for its reliability, created and used to construct correlations with

specific questions from the online questionnaire. This research shows that religiosity and spirituality may be

correlated with specific views of poverty as well as responses to questions concerning this issue. Additionally, it

shows that a diversity in framing the issue ideologically may vary from person to person.

2

II. Statement of the Problem

“What is riskier than living poor in America? Seriously, what in the world is riskier than being a poor

person in America? I live in a neighborhood where people are shot on my street corner. I live in a neighborhood

where people have to figure out how to get their kid into school ………Being poor is what is risky. We have to create

a safety net for poor people. And when we won’t, because they happen to look different from us, it (we do not

create a safety net for poor people) is the pervasive ugliness! We cannot do that!" (Melissa Harris Perry 2012). On

a September 2012 segment of Melissa Harris Perry discussing poverty, the news analyst breaks down the risk of

being poor in the United States by what Crunk Feminist commentators define as eloquent rage (Crunk Feminist

Collective 2012). Poverty has been a consistent social issue that touches every segment of society. The standard

definition of poverty is the condition of being without the adequate means for livelihood such as food, income or

shelter. In the United States, the government sets the measure for denoting whether an individual and/or family

are living in poverty which is termed either the “poverty threshold” or “the poverty line” (Department of Health

and Human Services 2013). The U.S. government defines poverty by the total income received on a yearly basis.

For example, last year the government defined a family of four with a $23,050 annual income as living in poverty

(Department of Health and Human Services, 2013). Though this is the way in which poverty is defined by the

government, poverty is a relative concept in which its definition is dependent upon social context and how specific

environments define poverty. Policy related alleviating poverty in the U.S. are related to countless events in history

that help inform issues related to worker’s rights, welfare assistance, educational policy and community oriented

programs related to serving those living in poverty.

Fifty years ago, President Lyndon B. Johnson used his first state of the union address to declare a “war on

human poverty and unemployment in the United States”. This declaration of a war on poverty resulted in the

initiation of social policies such as the creation of the Economic Opportunity Act, Food Stamp Act, Social Security

Act and Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Programs like Head Start, Jobs Corps, Community Action

Program as well as Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) are landmarks of the legacy of the War on Poverty

policy initiative. Pre-dating the entry of War on Poverty policy was the Social Gospel movement of the late

3

nineteenth and twentieth century. The Social gospel was a religious social reform movement: prominently made

up of Liberal Protestants; who advocated for social change by applying biblical principles of justice and charity

during the age of industrialization. The Social Gospel especially applied Christian principles to issues of poverty,

inequality and racial tensions. This movement lead to the development of settlement houses from 1880s-1920s,

social reform programs advocating for workers compensation and education programs that combatted inequalities

in learning. The social gospel is seen visible today in churches and organizations such as the Atlanta Mission and

Ebenezer Baptist Church. The Atlanta Mission has a religious motivation for ending homelessness through job

attainment programs plus transitional and emergency. Ebenezer Baptist Church hosts a financial literacy

empowerment program for the local community called the HOPE Fellowship.

The labor movement of the U.S. developed out of the necessity of protecting the shared interests of

workers, especially low wage workers. Predominately in the industrial sector, organized labor unions were formed

to fight for better wages, reasonable working hours and safer working conditions. From a Business standpoint,

labor was a commodity which makes wages dictated by supply and demand. As a result of the labor movement,

unions advocated that workers have the right to voice their opinions on what their wages and working conditions

should be since labor is not just a commodity, but a part of their social identity. Labor movements such as the

Knights of Labor, Atlanta Washer Women Strike in 19th century, National Textile strikes of as well as Auto Workers

Strikes of the 20th century and most recently the fight for a Living Wage, all show the growing resistance towards a

structure of labor that abuses citizens. The labor movements connect to this discussion of poverty as a result of

most the participants being low wage workers. Though not all labor movements are connected by an ideological

framework such as Marxism/Communism, but over time most labor movements emphasize unions, collective

action and the demand for better working conditions and treatment from employers as well as the government

through the implementation policies. Some labor movements had connections to religious ideological frameworks,

such as the founders of the Knights of Labor, Catholic Labor Movement, The Poor People’s Campaign The Jewish

Workers Committee as well as March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom; others were predominately secular

such as the Communist Party of the USA, Trade Union Educational League and most recently Jobs with Justice and

Raise the Minimum Wage Advocacy Groups.

4

Despite the momentum of movements predominately led by low wage workers and those in solidarity

with those living in poverty driven conditions, within the United States many ideals or characterizations of the poor

exist in public discourse that label the poor as lazy, unmotivated and abusers of the welfare system. Also many

people; whether they are public figures in the political world, social workers or community leaders of non-profit

agencies, use specific terminology to define poverty. This terminology is more than likely framed by pre-existing

ideals. These ideals of what constitutes poverty include how they view people living in conditions of poverty as

well as how they identify people who are impacted by this social issue. These ideals or concepts possibly shape the

methods public figures and community leaders use to engage the many dimensions of poverty. For example, the

story of the welfare queen caricature of a real person named Linda Taylor, who was considered an American

criminal who committed welfare fraud. Taylor was given title of the “welfare queen” and her story was told by

former President Ronald Reagan in order to dismantle social programs. His story eventually convinced many voters

that an epidemic of welfare fraud existed, this in turn demonized the poor and influenced cuts in public assistance.

Therefore, some ideals can be counterproductive in the fight against poverty. For instance the notion that those

living in poverty are not deserving of a safety net or access to resources is linked to an ideology of self-sufficiency

that defines American culture in the U.S; can lead to dismantling programs that actually help the poor.

David Hilfiker (2000); discussed how this notion of improving people was always connected to how people

thought about efforts to do something about poverty. This notion is rooted is in the application of this notion of

improved within in social work and connects to a long history in the United States. Early reformers connected to

Protestantism linked extreme poverty to laziness, drunkenness and intoxication in which they employed public

policy and philanthropy to change the character of those living in poverty. This notion however links to the idea

that the primary cause of poverty is the individual characteristics of the poor themselves: laziness, lack of training,

poor character, too many children and sexual promiscuity (Hilifiker 2000). Ironically this type of view point is linked

to the history of engaging issues of a poverty in a culture that consistently emphasizes individualism. Also Massey

(1998) discusses how the persistence of poverty among minorities; specifically African Americans, is connected to

the deliberate segregation of those living in poor conditions. Massey continues to state that even after the Fair

Housing Act in 1968; segregation of African Americans in urban centers was exacerbated by interconnecting set of

5

individual actions and governmental policies. This creation of segregation amongst African Americans causes an

underclass to be formed and deteriorates social as well as economic conditions during periods of economic

downturn. This same concept connects to the same stereotypes of the poor correlated to the discussion of cuts in

social programs that actually support the poor.

In a U.S. Census report on Poverty and Health Insurance in 2012, the official poverty rate was 15.0 percent

which is equivalent to 46.5 million people living in poverty and there was a 2.5 increase of the official poverty rate

in comparison to the official rate in 2007. The poverty rate for the South remained unchanged at 16.5 percent, yet

people living in poverty increased to 19.1 million in 2012 from 18.4 million in 2011. Also between the years of

2011 to 2012 the poverty rate for people living in the South did increase. The poverty rate for children under the

age of 18 in 2012 was 21.8 percent and for people between ages 18-64 was 13.4 percent. The poverty rates by age

and gender indicated that for each age group poverty rates among females were higher than rates for males.

Though Non-Hispanic whites account for 40.7 percent of the people living in poverty, Blacks account for 27.2

percent of people living below poverty while whites and Hispanics account for 9.7 percent and 25.6 of those living

below poverty respectively (United States Census Bureau 2013).

Mallory Boyd (N.d.) stated in her study concerning the American public’s perceptions of poverty and

equality, that though there are various definitions of poverty; few are accurate. This study discussed how U.S.

official standards are designed so that the issue of poverty can easily be overcame; yet those standards

underestimate the reality of those actually impoverished. Ironically, these standards subject those really

impoverished to invisibility, which causes others to be unaware of the extent of poverty. Furthermore this study

delved into a discussion of how perceptions of poverty are influenced by socio-economic status, structural and

individualistic explanations. Awkwardly, individual explanations dominate structural explanations of poverty.

Additionally this study indicated that people’s perceptions of poverty exacerbate the notion that the living poor; as

a class of people; are lazy, uneducated, unmotivated and primarily minorities. In fact, it is reported that for nearly a

quarter of the poor and non-poor, individuals living in poverty are perceived as simply just “lazy” people. These

perpetuated ideals are predominantly untrue characteristics of those living in poverty, and only work to limit the

possibility of change (Boyd N.d.). Also in a Salvation Army study on perceptions of poverty, they found that most

6

Americans believe that helping the poor is an important factor in alleviating poverty. Despite this fact, skeptical

beliefs such as” if people want a job they can find it”, “if you give out assistance people will take advantage of it” or

“people living poverty have low moral values” still pervade the American society’s perceptions of the poor

(Salvation Army 2012) . In light of this discussion, it can be inferred that there is power in perceptions and attitudes

that translate into how social issues like poverty are viewed and the extent to which the public address them (Boyd

N.d.). Therefore, counterproductive views of those living in the poor may serve to exacerbate the problem and

navigate away from developing a constructive understanding of poverty which could lead to improving the way it is

handled.

Contributor to Forbes magazine, Schawbel (2013), stated that there are over 80 million Millennials (born

from 1980S-early 2000s) that make up the population which makes them one of the largest generations compared

to others. Millennials are continuing to impact our society through increased activism, technology and diversity

which is increasingly shaping our culture today. Schawbel indicated that despite the impact of a poor economy,

millennials still strive to make time to give back to the community. Likewise Schawbel, stated that 81 percent of

them have donated money, goods and services to different causes. Also, millennials endeavor to choose causes

that align with their personal beliefs and values. Millennials, as proposed by this article, have some sort of

influence in the reshaping of ideas that construct the American society (Schawbel 2013).

What I am interested in is millennials’ increased involvement in the community through activism and

service as well as how they choose the causes they participant in. Specifically if they select issues that would align

to their own beliefs. This leads me to propose these questions: what are these guiding principles that lead to

millennials’, specifically college students’, involvement in activism and community service work and could these

guiding principles be essential to reshaping how we look at different social issues such as poverty? Therefore this

has led me to think critically and question whether ideologies play a particular role in shaping opinions or

perceptions of social phenomena. I choose to particularly look at ideologies in my study because the morals, ethics

and principles within religious, faith based and spiritual worldviews suggest the importance of helping and

supporting others as the right thing to do. Therefore I want to research if this same mindset is at work when

college students choose to serve others and participate in activism. Correspondingly I propose this question: how

7

do political and faith based ideologies, socioeconomic status as well as gender influence students’

perceptions/attitudes towards the concept of poverty? By political ideologies, I am referring to political views on

policies and governmental agencies that connect to either conservatism, liberalism or feminism. Faith based

ideologies can be connected to a particular religious institution or a particular spiritual outlook on life. Also does a

person’s religious or spiritual outlook play a role in how they view the poor, how they feel issues of poverty should

be addressed and how they identify people living in poverty? Furthermore, in relation to the concept of praxis,

how do students apply their perceptions to how they engage issues of poverty? By engage, I am referring to the

way students engaging thinking, discussing and participating in civic work related to poverty. Also, how do their

perceptions and social identities influence how they define social justice? Additionally, what are the

similarities/differences in individuals’ perceptions of poverty and poverty relief who operate from different

worldviews? The umbrella topic for this study seeks to understand what constitutes living in poverty based on

definitions and governmental standards, and how AUC students define poverty. Furthermore, how students

organize efforts to alleviate dimensions of poverty. Moreover I would like to focus on the significance of the

location of the Atlanta University Center in proximity to the West End and near other Fulton county

neighborhoods/communities in relation to actually dimensions of poverty that exist within the metro Atlanta area.

As a child growing up in Saint Louis, MO, I had personal experience with the impact of engaging the issue

of poverty in my own community on a day to day basis especially resulting from having parents who are morally

conscious and engaged this issue personally. As I gradually matured I noted narratives that I lived by that spoke to

this issue on a persistent basis which came from engaging my faith in the Christian doctrine. I decided to research

this topic as a result of wanting to bridge the gap between sociological paradigms such as conflict theory and

symbolic interactionism and ideological beliefs that I hold true. I wanted to find a way to study a specific

ideological belief in an objective way under the framework of sociology. Also my own social advocacy specifically

deals with the social issue of poverty, therefore I wanted to find a way to use this senior thesis as a way to frame

my own social justice practices. My own religious background as a Christian has shaped the ways in which I frame

my advocacy and social justice activities as well as what motivates my own actions and thoughts concerning this

issue. As a Shepherd Intern for the Shepherd Poverty Alliance I worked in Charleston, WV with the Covenant House

8

which is a non-profit agency that advocates for those impacted by dimensions of poverty by helping to alleviate

the financial, emotional physical and, social burdens experienced by those suffering through these conditions. As I

result of working at the Covenant House, I had the opportunity to consistently interact with civic leaders and

people living in conditions of poverty. In turn I engaged in personal, emotional and critical conversations with civic

leaders and those living in poverty. Also working with non-profit agencies and churches in the Atlanta area such as

Atlanta Community Food Bank and Friendship Baptist Church that work to alleviate issues of poverty through food

drives and mentorship/educational services: has shaped my own ideals of the extent of this social issue. As a result

of these experiences, it has also impacted how I built an understanding of the conditions poverty and the

importance of empathy towards those living in poverty in the metro Atlanta community.

Within this study I will conduct a questionnaire amongst AUC students to unveil the perspectives they

have about this topic. Also a content analysis will done of both secular and religious non-profit websites work to

alleviate issues related to poverty in the metro Atlanta area. This analysis will be conducted in order to understand

existing ideological viewpoints that motivate each agency’s service and advocacy plus whether or not these

differences in ideological views impact the methods each organization uses to combat issues related to poverty.

Likewise, if each organization identifies what constitutes as poverty in different ways due to their ideological

differences. This content analysis will help with building the research that I will conduct with students within the

AUC by outlining pre-existing motives that guide public organizations’ work and how they frame their actions,

ideas and attitudes about poverty. The research questions that will guide my content analysis will be as follows:

How does each organization define poverty, what values/principles guide the work they do, what are the programs

they offer to mitigate poverty relief, are there themes that are consistent on each organizations website which

includes images and language additionally what is the prominent race/ethnicity of organization members (workers,

leaders) and the recipients?

My goal is to understand how AUC students connect their beliefs and values to the discussion of issues of

poverty. What makes this unit of analysis unique is that this particular topic takes into account African American

students’ opinions who are situated within an area where they are exposed to elements of poverty. This study not

only evaluates the views of a particular racial/ethnic group, but I also seeks to understand how class and

9

socioeconomic background can influence AUC students’ views of the poor. What religious ideologies influence

students’ perceptions of poverty? Considering the discussion of place, I would like to understand how being

situated in a college; which is considered to be a site of socialization, could potentially impact narratives students

construct about the existence and extent of poverty in their surrounding community. Specifically, despite the

existence of class differences among students; they are all socialized to be inserted into a particular social class

throughout their matriculation which could impact their views on particular social issues like poverty. This study

will add knowledge to poverty studies by focusing on African American college students who are situated within an

area where distinct elements of poverty exist. This study will also evaluate if there is an impact of religious and

spiritual ideologies on perceptions of the poor which includes how they should be treated and the ways issues of

poverty should be addressed. In light of sociology of religion, this study can show how social institutions, influence

individuals views of social issues. This study is considered exploratory research, since it will uncover what students

can offer to dialogue of issues of poverty particularly related to dominant dialogue/debate within the public arena

concerning the issue of poverty.

10

III. Literature Review

There are many research studies that dive into the discussion of religious ideologies impact on

perceptions or views of social engagement, social coping and organizing groups against an issue such as poverty.

Additionally there are articles/studies that also present an opposing argument to the positive influence of

religious ideologies on poverty relief/alleviation. Preexisting and developing studies of the concept of poverty and

the impact of religious ideologies on perceptions and attitudes towards ethics, confronting challenges, alleviating

poverty or perpetuating it will be reviewed.

a. Altruism

Within the review of literature there were three studies that looked at the concept of altruism and

altruistic behavior. The first study conducted by Chang-Ho C. JI, Lori Pendergraft and Matthew Perry (2006) was

interested in measuring the influence of personal religion on altruistic belief among Protestant adolescents using a

multidimensional view of personal religion which included the following concepts: extrinsic religiosity, intrinsic

religiosity, doctrinal orthodoxy and faith maturity. The second study was conducted by Jacqueline S. Mattis et. al.

(2009) which focused on examining what motivates altruism amongst individuals from low income, inner city

neighborhoods experiencing strife, violence and family breakdown. Lastly the third study which was conducted by

Vincent Jeffries et. al. (2006) which focused on supporting how establishing the concept of altruism and solidarity;

which is the ability to relate or empathize with others, as a distinct field of specialization in Sociology would bring

contributions to understanding how these two positive phemenona structure interpersonal, intergroup as well as

international relations. This third study did not specifically examine the dimensions of altruism and solidarity in

research of individuals who either participated in this type of behavior nor did it examine individual’s attitudes

towards these concepts. What makes this study distinct from the other studies I reviewed concerning the concept

of altruism, it includes sociological concepts such as August Comte’s paired concept egoism-altruism to explain

the underlining motives behind all social relations and Durkheim’s discussion of altruism’s influence as an

contention on social integration/disintegration in the case of certain types of suicide. It also discusses altruism as

11

encompassing two elements which include altruistic motivation and behavior. It also highlights how altruism can

take many forms which range from egocentric accommodation to universal love. Unlike the study conducted by

Chang-Ho et. al. (2006), the Jacqueline S. Mattis et. al. (2009) study included a focus on the concept of social

capital which included social trust and the development of social networks as ways in which altruism operated

within the study group. Although this study discussed how altruistic behavior can be motivated by deeply rooted

ideological beliefs which varied from religious, political and humanistic values, this study unlike Chang Ho. C JI, et

al. study, included discussion of other theories that explained the motivation behind altruistic behavior which

included evolutionary theories connected to a biological altruism that is pre-wired and highly dependent on

ensuring the survival of groups who are similar to people genetically, economic theories that connect engagement

in altruism to a weighing of the personal and communal benefits of altruistic action against the costs, situational

conditions that motivate people to care for others (natural disasters) and relational roots that discuss altruism

being engaged by people who already have established positive relationships with people in a particular

communities or social identity groups (Jacqueline S. Mattis et. al. 2009). The study on religiosity, altruism and

protestant youth was a large scale questionnaire administered to 16,000 6th to 12th students and was primarily

quantitative (Chang-Ho et. al. 2006: 156-178). The study on altruism among low income individuals in the inner

city employed qualitative techniques such as in depth interviews with participants and ethnographic techniques

such as developing relationships with community members over several months as well as allowing some

community members to participate in refining and rewriting interview questions before administering them to

participants.

b. Extrinsic, Intrinsic religiosity

Similar to the Chang-Ho C. JI, et. al study, the study conducted by Shiou-Yu Chen and Chung-Chu in 2009

used Intrinsic religious orientation and extrinsic religious orientation as key concepts of their study, yet their

focus was on investigating the relationship between personal religious orientations and ethical ideologies. Both of

these studies defined extrinsic religiosity/orientation as individuals who participated in religious actions in hope of

some sort of gain and intrinsic religious orientation act on account of their convictions or beliefs. Both of these

studies use intrinsic and extrinsic religiosity as measures of religiosity through using a similar Religiosity Scale.

12

Although the Cheng and Chung Chu studied used a modified version of the Religiosity Scale which allowed them to

measure intrinsic and extrinsic religiosity among religious and non-religious persons. Unlike the Chang-Ho C. JI, el.

al study, the Cheng and Chung Chu study focused on ethical Ideology as two dimensions of moral philosophy

which were idealism and relativism which worked as guiding principles for ethical perceptions (principles that

shape their view of the world) and moral judgments (differentiating between right and wrong the source). Also

this study included participants from multiple religious and non-religious backgrounds who either attended

religious or secular institutions (Taoist, Christian, Buddhist, those that held civil beliefs (belief in multiple god

worship of nature, souls and/or of the spirits of ancestors), Catholic, and the rest were nonreligious unlike the

Chang Ho study where are participants were adolescent Protestants from schools connected to Protestant

organizations and churches. In both studies demographic information such as sex, race and ethnicity were

discussed casually, but were barely highlighted within the discussion. Also each of these studies discussed the

motivation behind right action, yet there was not an in depth discussion of how religious orientation or ethical

ideology is expressed in social behavior (pro-social behavior) and altruism if at all. Each of these studies were large

based survey questionnaire research was a missing a discussion of how the significance of socioeconomic class of

study participants on actions that correlated with altruism and pro-social behaviors which limits a more in depth

discussion of altruism and pro-social behavior among students. Lastly there was no discussion if the

socioeconomic class of study participants had any influence on actions that correlated with altruism and pro-social

behaviors.

c. Religion and civic/voluntary involvement

There were two studied that focused solely on studying religion and its impact on service work. The first

study was conducted I Mylek and P Nel (2010) engages in exploring what makes a religion an effective tool in

rallying civic leaders and actors in transitional poverty relief and development concerning the issue of global

poverty. Also this study is interested in exploring what motivates civil actors from the Global North specifically in

New Zealand to engage in social justice issues in the different parts of the world and sense many of these civic

actors have religious connections how this factor influences their actions. The second study was done by

Christopher J. Einolf and was centered on examining how religious values, ideals and language promote prosocial

13

behaviors. They study done by Mylek and Nel investigated four concepts which included global poverty,

sociological based theories like religious social capital, content and cultural Power. The theory of social capital was

operationalized as social networks that are of value, which is due to personal connections inherent them and

norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that come from them. The religious content relates to the beliefs, values

and norms present in religion that links thought to action which can work as a source of inspiration for work one

does. Lastly religious cultural power refers to the ability of religious institutions to influence political activity

and/or outcomes by attracting cultural resources such as symbols, ideologies, moral authority and cultural

meanings which make messages relatable to bigger audiences which can generate tangible resources such as

money, political support and social connections (Myelk and Nel 2009). The study by Einolf focuses on subjective

religiosity, pro-social behavior instead of altruism, and helping to study volunteering, charitable giving and serving

others through employment.

Each of these studies focused primarily on studying Christians, the first research study used two non-

governmental Christian based organizations (World Vision New Zealand and TEAR Fund New Zealand) for analysis

and the second study randomly selected 94 individuals from the Mac Arthur Foundation’s MIDUS study in 1995.

Both studies included content analysis within their analysis with Mylek and Nel analyzing content on each

organizations website such as mission statements, religious practices, partnerships with other organizations and

the study by Einolf examining life history interviews in the survey by the study sample focusing on respondents’

prosocial actions in the spheres of family, politics, religion, paid employment, volunteer work, and charitable

giving. The study done by Einolf mentioned that some respondents were non-Christian which included one

atheist, seven agnostics and one Jew. In the study by Eniolf there was only a discussion of the complexity

surrounding social scientists attempts to link religiosity and pro-social behavior as well as to measure, and how

previous sociological studies focus on the importance of social networks in explaining differences in religious

giving and discrediting subjective religiosity. Yet, there was no discussion of previous studies that debunk the idea

of religiosity being linked to pro-social behaviors. However, the study by Mylek and Nel discussed the

secularization theory which presents the idea that religious institutions have lost their social significance as a

14

result of modernization in the twentieth century, which debunks the idea of religion being an effective tool in any

sphere of public life including organization around public issues such as poverty.

My research topic studied the concept of poverty, particularly African American Atlanta University

students’ perceptions/attitudes towards poverty which includes: what ideas shape their definitions of poverty,

how do they view the poor which examines the validity of the Oscar Lewis’ theory of culture poverty amongst this

particular group of people. Also I have examined how students’ believe issues of poverty should be addressed in

policy, service and social justice activities. Additionally I studied how students identify those living in poverty

through specific identifying markers such as class, employment, income and residence etc. The overarching topic

address the concept of praxis, which means I asked questions to discover what religious ideologies exist among

AUC students and how these ideologies influence the ways in which students thought about engaging issues of

poverty. Correspondingly, this looked to see if religious ideological frameworks also influence the ways in which

students’ define the concept of social justice. Similar to Shiou-Yu Chen and Chung-Chu Liu as well as Chang-Ho C.

JI, et. al. studies, an Religiosity and Spirituality orientation scale was used to measure attitudes and perceptions of

poverty in light of ideological leanings which will take in account for persons who are also non-religious. Unlike

these studies, a mixed methods approach was used integrating the use of focus groups, one interviews and an

online questionnaire. Similar to the Jacqueline S. Mattis et. al. ethnographic, a group of individuals within the

proximity of a low income area and from diverse religious as well as spiritual ideological backgrounds were

studied within my research. Unlike the Jacqueline S. Mattis et. al study, AUC students were from multiple

socioeconomic class backgrounds and regions as a result of conducting this study on a college campus and these

differences were also taken into account in this study. The concept of altruism and altruistic behavior will be

assessed in light of studying how students define social justice, how they think issues of poverty should be

engaged and addressed within the community. Comparable to I Mylek and P Nel’s study, a content analysis will be

conducted from the transcribed notes collected from focus groups and interviews to understand religious

ideological terminology associated with views of the poor and engagement of helping those in need.

15

IV. Theory and Research Questions

The central idea of my thesis is this notion of “engagement” with a particular issue such as poverty and

the impact of social identities that may inform discussion and action. The theoretical framework that will be

employed is an analysis of the relationship between belief and engagement. How does an individual’s ideological

viewpoint influence how they think about poverty or the poor? What identities do college students in particular,

bring into the discussion of poverty that inform how they conceptualize and engage the issue? Working through a

method of grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss 1967), an overview of debates about poverty within sociological,

anthropological and governmental contexts was conducted. Additionally, the following question was investigated:

how do religious and political views inform student discourse about poverty? Furthermore, how does spirituality

inform students’ attitudes about poverty? Also, do factors of race, gender and socioeconomic status construct

discourse about poverty within academic, public and governmental sites? Within the analysis of sociological

debates vs. students about poverty, divergent views of poverty was investigated. Also this analysis will bring in the

discussion of culture of poverty within the domain of anthropological study as well as studies on stratification and

power.

Within the sociological circles vs. students, the existence and persistence of poverty was explained

through the lenses of two frameworks; individualistic explanations and structural explanations. Individualistic

explanations for the existence and sustainment of poverty focus more on the intrinsic behaviors of individuals

being the focal point of the marginalized economic and social despair. Structural explanations trace the choices of

those living in poverty, to outside structural sources that help to shape and sustain poverty (Carl 2010). Thus,

structural theories trace back poverty to the actions and behaviors of governments, corporations, wealthy social

groups and other economic conditions that nurture inequality (Carl 2010.). Within these categories there are seven

theories that explain the existence of poverty which are as follows: Oscar Lewis’ Neo-Marxist theory of Culture of

Poverty (1959), Charles Murray’s The Underclass (1990), Mike O’Brien’s discussion of New Right distinctions of the

Deserving and Underserving Poor (1997), Max Weber’s Three Component Stratification Theory ([1922]2005), C

Wright Mills’ Elite Theory (1956) and Karl Marx’s Theory of Class Conflict and Capitalism (1867). In relation to this

research project, the examination of these theories assisted with framing student discourse and attitudes about

16

poverty. Especially in the way that they rationalized poverty and linked its causes to either to systematic and

structural issues, associated its causes to individual decisions or a mixture of both frames.

In the Culture and poverty: Critque and Counter Proposals, specifically the Self-Perpetuating Social Class

chapter, it traces the orientation of individualistic doctrines that perpetuate the act of blaming the victim to one

African American social thinker, E. Franklin Frazier (Valentine 1968:17-18). The following passage shows his

ideological framing; which is Nathan Glazer’s foreword of Frazier’s The Negro Family in the United States:

The Negro is applauded for surviving in a society based on laissez faire and competition, for his strivings, for the curbing of individual desires and impulses, for assimilating a new mode of life [white middle class patterns]. By contrast of course his failure to strive and curb his impulses would be seen as his failure rather than society’s failure, though society—history---would certainly have to share a good part of the blame (Glazer 1966: xvi).

Charles Valentine; an anthropologist who critiqued the Culture of Poverty thesis, argues that much of

writing of “lower class” or “underclass” cultures comes from studies of Black Americans. The Frazierian Tradition of

tracing their economic and social failure to moralistic denigration is reproduced in the writings of Nathan Grazer

and Daniel P. Mohyian (Valentine 1968: 20-37). Due to the portrayal of a culture of poverty in Frazier’s works as

well as Glazer and Mohyian; this prompted the advent of national policy discourse embedded with the doctrine of

a deviant subculture (Valentine 1968: 20-37)... This deviates from a discussion of health and welfare of the

marginalized, centers discourse on conformity to respectability politics (Valentine 1968: 20-37).

Overviewing discourse and theorizing around poverty in sociological, anthropological and political circles,

in turn builds an understanding of how issues are framed and the ways in which they are address. Thus an

overview of the governmental discourse surrounding poverty is needed to understand the ways in which narratives

have constructed public policy. Over the course of more than 50 years, the ways in which poverty was discussed,

combatted through the implementation of policy, alleviated or escalated has changed over time. When President

Lyndon B. Johnson (term-1963-1969) first introduced the “War on Poverty”, in his speech he discussed how every

citizen should have shared opportunities to develop and grow their capacities as well as the need to destroy

barriers that cause people to be trapped in poverty such as racial injustice and “squalid” and hostile environments

(Johnson 1964). Additionally he also mentions how citizens need a decent education and the impact of negative

health outcomes (Johnson 1964). Some political writers state that his exposure to extreme poverty in during

childhood in Stonewall, Texas, where he lived in fear that the bank would take away his home and lacked food as

17

well as during his career as a teacher in Texas teacher informed his introduction of policy on Poverty (Boundless

n.d.). Also this advent of national public policy under the umbrella of “War on Poverty” took place during the

momentum of the Civil Rights Movement with the signing of the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Increased societal

awareness of the social ills of inequity based on race; helped to support the introduction of LBJ’s policy. Even after

LBJ’s Presidency, his predecessor President Richard Nixon partially embraced the War on Poverty policy by adding

an automatic cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in 1972 as well as playing a lead role in the implementation of the

Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) and Supplemental Security Income. Yet, Nixon tightened

requirements for welfare, dismantled the Office of Economic Opportunity as well as altered Community Action

agencies which further hindered upward mobility. Although, as a result of War on Poverty measures, many citizens

were lifted from extreme levels of poverty; a culture shift towards conservatism took place where the popularity of

poverty alleviating programs dwindled (Public Broadcasting Service 2014)

When President Ronald Reagan came into office in 1981, he focused on cutting spending. For instance,

during his inaugural address his top priority was the economic turmoil of the United’s and the principle solutions

he advocated were limited government and promotion of private enterprise. He attempted to do so by cutting

domestic programs that helped working class citizens which greatly impacted the poor, yet he increased the

military budget. Although, some citizens saw his presidency as a period of economic growth for the country; it was

a constraining moment for working class citizens (Dreir 2004). Income taxes for the rich were slashed in half while

income taxes for the working class were raised which he defined as “Trickle down Economics”. Trickle down

Economics was the idea that tax breaks for business and upper class citizens would help poorer citizens by

stimulating the economy. President Reagan and his administration continuously made attacks on the US Welfare

System, specifically Welfare Entitle Programs additionally, the gap between the rich and the poor widened,

citizens below the poverty level increased and homelessness spiked in urban centers around the nation (Drier

2004). What supported his policy actions was the ideology of self-sufficiency, which goes back to individualistic

explanations for poverty. Such statements as the following: “the homeless make their own choice of staying out

there” (Roberts 1988). The four pillars of Reaganomics which were reducing government spending, income and

capital gains tax and government regulation as controlling the money supply by decreasing inflation; were what

drove his policies (Amadeo 2014) .

18

President Bill Clinton (term -1993-2001) entered the presidency during the economic boom of the 1990s,

yet poverty still persisted at a rate of 15%. Although Bill Clinton was a Democrat, he took a conservative take on

governing, specifically in working with Republicans to drastically transform the welfare system by tightening

working requirements. Yet in still, healthcare was expanded during his term with the Child Health Insurance

Program (CHIP) which enabled children in households a little above the poverty line to receive healthcare (On the

Issues 2014). The following mantra supported his actions, “People who work hard, and play the rules shouldn’t be

poor” (On the Issues 2014). This ideological view merged traditionally held views of personal initiative and self-

sufficiency, with liberal ideas of help. Georgia W. Bush during his term; 2004-2008, it was a moment of increased

government spending on wars in both Iran and Afghanistan, but also on an expensive expansion of Medicaid for

Medicare D. This expansion was included a drug program for seniors which installed to subsidize the cost of

expensive prescription drugs and it fit with his ideological view point of passionate conservatism (On the Issues

2014). Under the veil of this philosophy was a goal to help people help themselves by creating policies that

supported this view. This view connects to individualistic ideology which advocates those “pulling themselves up

by their boot straps.” Also, Bush discussed lowering taxes for single mothers and he put an emphasis on home

ownership among low income individuals as well as focusing on the No Child Left behind Act as a jobs act (On the

Issues). Also, he expressed the importance of faith based voluntary/community service agencies changing lives

over secular institutions, yet at the same time proposing to cut 1/3 of Section 81.

President Barrack Obama (term-2008-2016) stepped into his presidency during a time of economic

upheaval, the Recession of 2009 was in full effect. Throughout his presidency many discourses has been attached

to him such as him being the “Food Stamp President”, “Socialist” and a Communist based on certain reforms he

has developed around healthcare reform with the Affordable Care Act, immigration reform as well as with

advocating for increased government spending in general. The unemployment rate grew from 4.7% in 2007 to 10%

in 2009, job growth was uneven and there was a lack of regulatory controls on the trading of stocks, especially

among the investment banking sector (Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality 2014). Despite these conditions,

Obama still managed to pass legislation that not only to recapitalize banks in order for them to get back on their

1 In 2004 , President George W. Bush proposed major cuts to the Section 8 housing voucher program, which eliminated 250,000 vouchers in 2005 and 600,000 vouchers by 2009 –amounting to a 30 percent cut.

19

feet during the financial crisis, but also impact individuals and families living in poverty (Stanford Center on Poverty

and Inequality 2014). The principles that guided his anti-poverty polices are as follows:

Stem the Tide for low income populations hit hard by the financial recession, Expand Opportunities for access to good paying jobs, affordable housing and the development of job skills, and Strengthen Families by promoting responsible fatherhood and assisting single mother parents (White House 2014). As the child of a father from Kenya, raised in single mother household with assistance from his grandparents

as well as his dedication to public service work before his presidency; all have built his belief o unite people around

politics of purpose (White House 2014). Even with this personal history, some of his ideological framing of poverty

still is permeated with views of one earning one’s way out of poverty by being willing to work for it (Goldfarb

2014). For instance, Ta-Neshi Coates illustrated in many of his speeches in front of all black audiences are

permeated with the view that the culture of poverty is synonymous with black culture with “the tendency of youth

in black communities to make bad choices (Coates 2014).” He passed the American Recovery and Investment act

to stimulate economic growth and produce more jobs; specifically in the private sector. Additionally he signed he

signed legislation that would expand healthcare coverage for uninsured children allowing documented immigrants

to enroll instead of having to wait five years. Also during his term spending on SNAP, Community Services Block

Grant, which states it would help revitalize low income communities with job training and financial literacy

programs, were increased. Also programs for preventing Homelessness, helping low income families with energy

bills and the expansion of the both Medicaid and Pell Grants were introduced. Furthermore programs to assist low

income workers the break they needed with the Earned Income Tax Credit. All of the policies have managed to

reduce deep poverty and the poverty rate as a whole (Glastris et. al 2014). Also it is being stated that out of the

37.6 Million people who were poor in 2009, 26.4 Million stayed in poverty 34 months later and 12.6 Million

escaped poverty but 13.5 Million people fell into poverty (Boyer 2014). Despite the measures previously stated,

poverty still increased from an official rate of 12.5 percent in 2007 to 15% in 2011, unemployment rate is at an all-

time high since 2000 and income and wealth inequality rising (Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality 2014).

Just recently, the President has been trying to push policy in favor of raising the Minimum wage, which would raise

the hourly wage from $7.25 to $10.10. Upon reviewing ideological views and policy decision concerning poverty by

Presidential administration and overview of social discourse and action on poverty is needed.

20

While speaking of the ideological views that supported the policy decisions of some of the Presidents of the

United States, it is important to look at various faith groups social action as it pertains to the issue of poverty in

America (STRITT 2014).. This essential concerning this study, because offers information on how poverty has been

framed in religious discourse which helped with building an analysis of how religion and spirituality frame

discourse. The religious roots of social progressivism trace back its early beginnings to 19th century development of

social reformers within the settlement movement such as Jane Adams, Josiah Strong and Richard T. Ely (Hansan

2014). This movement was more focused on being “friendly and open households,” a space for privileged

members of society to live and labor as pioneers in poor areas and majority urban areas where social and

environmental problems persisted (Hansan 2014). This movement was coupled by ideological frameworks of

progressive Protestantism, which merge intellectual and moral leadership especially social scientific knowledge

about Social Issues. Even with this being a progressive era of social action, major settlement houses did not allow

Blacks migrating from the South to North, to live in these houses. Thus a parallel movement emerged pushed by

Black female activists such as Ida B. Wells and reformers creating black settlement houses where a culture of

empowerment and resistance was fostered, foreshadowing African American social movements in the years to

come (Hounmeno 2012). Then the popularity of the settlement house movement waned, and the early 20th

century brought the prominence of the Social Gospel Movement. As mentioned earlier, this was largely a

Protestant Christian intellectual movement and was predominately conservative. Application of Christian ethics to

social problems such as economic inequality, poverty, labor unions, crime, alcoholism and squalor environments.

The movement was not supported by a static ideology, there were participants in this movement with differing

ideological views that made them focus on particular issues and causes (Stritt 2014). Some tenements of the social

gospel are seen in the political doctrine of some icons like Martin Luther King Jr. and Ida B. Well’s anti-lynching

crusades. Some remnants of the movement have survived through such organizations as the Salvation Army and

the early beginnings of Habitat for Humanity.

The introduction of the 21st century has brought an increase of collective action across a broad groups of

people representing various identities; in this case religious or spiritual identities. The Occupy Wall Street

movement, though an un-sustained one, was praised for inclusiveness of bring together people from various faith

groups to fight against economic inequality. Interfaith coalitions are growing immensely to challenge various issues

21

such as worker’s justice, poverty and immigration rights as well as reform. The advent of this movement is due to a

shared consciousness of the struggles that plague all Americans, no matter the age, sex, gender, racial/ethnic

identity as well as sexuality of the individuals; especially dealing with the economic justice (Woodiwiss and Paysour

2011). Movements are continually rising and shedding light on the many dimensions of the issue of poverty such as

the Raise the Wage Movement in particular Walmart protests, growing education reform movement as well as the

ever growing movement against police brutality and discriminatory practices against minorities groups in

marginalized communities like Ferguson, Missouri. For instance the equating of black culture to a pathology which

supports narratives that people like Michael Brown and Renisha McBride deserved to be shot because they were

“thugs” or “trouble”.

With the socio-historical context of ideological framings of poverty in the tradition of Sociology and

Anthropology, government, religion as well as in different moments of time; this study attempted to pull

ideological framing of the issue of poverty from HBCU College Students in the AUC. Furthermore, with HBCUs

being known for their dominant dedication to educating Black students and serving low income students; how

does this inform views on the poor? Furthermore, this study provides analysis of the importance of religious and

spiritual affiliation in crafting discourse about poverty among HBCU students additionally how could the

socialization processes at Spelman, Morehouse and Clark Atlanta University impact student views about poverty?

The research questions that will explored in this study are the following:

R1. How do religiosity and/or spirituality among HBCU students in the AUC influence their perceptions of the

poor?

R1A. What is the relationship between religiosity and views on the Medicaid, Welfare and most recently the Affordable Care Act?

R1B. What is the relationship between spirituality and views on the Medicaid, Welfare and most recently the Affordable Care Act?

R2. How do students respond to specific images and representations of the poor in media, specifically

documentaries on the Working poor and images from mainstream online news articles? (Washington Post,

Huffington Post, CNN, etc)

R3. How do students rationalize poverty?

• How does students’ perspectives of poverty correlate with political ideological viewpoints on poverty?

22

• Also will analyze students’ feelings concerning poverty in relation to Oscar Lewis’ social theory of the culture of poverty. (Whether or not students believe people living in poverty predominately have lifestyles or social norms that influence their social status)R4. What are students’ views concerning social change and action?

• Based on how students feel, what more do they believe should be done about this issue? • Does their discourse surrounding this issue include the topic of race?• Within the concept of praxis, how can students’ views on poverty apply to social justice advocacy for those affected by poverty?

My study will venture to understand the play between belief and engagement, and how ideological views are

embedded within student’s understandings of poverty in the United States.

23

V. Methodology, Scope and Limitations

a. Research Design

For this particular research study, I employed a mixed methods approach to analyze the research

questions related to students’ views of about those living in poverty, anti-poverty policies and how the issue of

poverty should be addressed. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze the research

questions which deals with the relationship between religiosity and spirituality on students perceptions of

poverty, attitudes about SNAP, Welfare and the Affordable Care Act. An online questionnaire was administered to

students in the AUC to understand their personal religious and spiritual views, attitudes towards specific U.S.

government programs that address poverty as well as their views of those who live in poverty. The online

questionnaire will contained 6 different sections which were as follows: Defining Poverty, Views on Policies,

Religiosity and Spirituality Scale, Framing Poverty as an Issue, Perceptions of those living in Poverty and how do

you Survive Living in Poverty. In total these six sections contained 39 items. A demographics section was on the

questionnaire which asked questions about students’ age, sex, gender, parents’ educational background, family

composition, school attendance and other important demographic information. The demographics section

contained 11 items in total. The survey took 10-15 minutes to complete. The survey was administered via email

blasts from Sociology/Anthropology professors, the Social Justice Fellows Program and the Bonner Office, social

media websites such as Instagram, Facebook, GroupMe and Twitter. Also, students whom expressed an interest in

taking the survey provided emails to me personally and I administered the online survey via mobile text and

personal email messages. The central questions that guided this analysis were as follows: How does religiosity and

spirituality influence how students perceive the poor, Why do students believe that people are poor?, What is the

relationship between religiosity and views on the SNAP Program, Welfare and most recently the Affordable Care

Act and What is the relationship between spirituality and views on the SNAP Program, Welfare and most recently

the Affordable Care Act? Additionally, I analyzed how students’ views on poverty connect with various political

ideological viewpoints such as feminism, conservatism and liberalism. Finally, questions were asked concerning

students’ engagement as well as what motivated them to be civically involved surrounding this issue of poverty.

24

This was done to understand what ideological views motivate each person to do their work and if there will be

similar/dissimilar motives for their work despite differing ideological viewpoints.

b. Interview Schedule

For my research study I conducted one on one interviews as well as a focus group using a 17 item open

ended interview schedule with one video and 4-5 photos students analyzed. The interviews will be between 30

minutes-45 minutes and will take place predominately on Spelman’s Campus in the Research Suite in Giles and in

a requisitioned study room at the Robert Woodruff Library. Since I am interested in evaluating and critiquing

Oscar Lewis’ culture of poverty theory, questions were asked to understand how people view the poor and to see

how that impacts their interactions and ideals about poverty in the metro Atlanta area. Also sense my study also

deals with assessing the impact of religion and spirituality on community engagement and understanding of

poverty, a customized version of the Personal Religious Orientation Scale was employed. Two scales will be

included on the questionnaire, a Religiosity and Spirituality Scale which will each be analyzed to see how they

correlate with attitudes towards the poor as well as concerning specific anti-poverty programs. Informed consent

will be administered in order for all focus groups and one on one interviews to be recorded and transcribed for

data analysis.

25

c. Sampling Methods and Limitations

For this research study I employed the convenience sampling method in order to recruit students to

participate in this Thesis project (Frankfort-Nachmias and Leon-Guerro 2010). Students were recruited via email

blasts from Sociology/Anthropology professors, social media websites such as Facebook, Instagram and GroupMe

as well as by personal email upon expressing interest in participating. Also, methods were employed in order for

me to conduct focus groups in Sociology/Anthropology courses via invitation from Sociology/Anthropology

professors. Furthermore, students were recruited at the Robert Woodruff Library in order to get a convenience

sample of all genders from all institutions within the Atlanta University Center. Also, I connected with Spelman’s

Bonner Office, received a contact list of Bonner Students and invited them to participate in my research study.

Due to the fact that this method was employed to recruit research participants; there were inherent

biases. In some cases, there was an under-representation or over representation of specific social groups within

the sample (Frankfort-Nachmias and Leon-Guerro 2010). For instance, there were more female students from

Spelman that participated than male students and other students at Clark and Morehouse. Measures were taken

to avoid this occurrence, but this still took place due to the sampling method I employed. Additionally, since there

was no specific sampling frame used; this means the sample was not random (Frankfort-Nachmias and Leon-

Guerro 2010). Therefore, this hindered the ability to make generalizations about the population due to inherent

bias (Frankfort-Nachmias and Leon-Guerro 2010). .

26

VI. Data Analysis

A mixed methods approach was used in order to quantify the views of the poor and anti-poverty policies are

prevalent within the AUC’S population as well as to engage in-depth exploratory study of students understandings

of poverty and anti-poverty to untether deeper connections with other social phenomena such religiosity,

spirituality, political ideologies, gender and socioeconomic status. Additionally, this study analyzes why students

believe people are poor, how political ideologies, socioeconomic status and gender influence these views and how

students feel this issue should be addressed. The qualitative methods employed within this study were as follows:

focus groups and one on one interviews. The quantitative method employed within this study was an online

survey which was administered to AUC students. There are three sections; with sub sections related to research

questions, included in this chapter that analyze the results of each method separately.

a. Online Questionnairei. Demographics

AUC students were recruited to take the survey via email blasts from the Sociology and Anthropology

Department, Spelman College Social Justice Fellows Program as well as the Spelman Bonner Office. The online

survey link was also posted online via Facebook, LinkedIn and Groupme. Additionally, the questionnaire was

administered to students in Upper Manley via an iPad, Laptop and mobile devices. A total of 155 students agreed

to take the take the online survey, but between 59-65 students actually partially or fully completed the online

survey. Out the students who partially or fully completed the survey, 80.0% were female students within the AUC

and only 20.0% of the students were male. Majority of the students who participated were from Spelman College

(47 students), which connects to the inherent bias due to an overrepresentation of students from Spelman and an

underrepresentation of students from Morehouse (10) , Clark Atlanta (2) and the Interdenominational

Theological Center (ITC). Most students who participated were Sophmores, Juniors and Seniors.

The majority of the students indicated that they were Black/African American (91.9%), only 1.6%

respondents indicated that they were Asian and Hispanic/Lation respectively. Only 4.8% of students choose the

option “Other” for their Racial and Ethnic Identity. Most students indicated that they were either Employed-Part

Time, Unemployed and seeking work or Unemployed, but not seeking work. Other students who choose the option

27

“Other”, indicated that they were Students, Researchers, Unpaid or Paid Interns or abroad while indicating their

usual work status in the States. Almost half of the students indicated that they were Single, with fewer than 3

indicating that they were either Engaged or Divorced. For family compostion, most students indicated that they

were raised in a Biological Two Parent Married Family and Single Mother Family; few indicated that they grew up in

a Biological Two Parent Cohabitating family, Married Step Family and Cohabitating family ( mother/father living

with a significant other) and a Single Father family- including an adoptive father. One respondent indicated that

they grew up in a Single Mother Family- divorced. Most students indicated that ether of their Parents’ highest level

of education was either Some College, 4 Year College/University Degree or Professional/Graduate Degree.

Additionally, most students indicated that they were a 6 or 7 on the Liberal Scale, 3 on the Conservative Scale, and

7 or 10 on the Feminist scale.

Table 1Most students who participated in taking the survey were Females (80.0%). Few males

participated in in taking the survey (20.0%). No participants indicated that they were either transgender or refused to answer the question.

GenderFrequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

ValidMale 12 7.7 20.0 20.0

Female 48 31.0 80.0 100.0Total 60 38.7 100.0

Missing System 95 61.3Total 155 100.0

28

Table 2Majority of the participants in the online survey were either 19-21 years of age, with the

largest percentage being 21 year olds (30.6%). Very participants were older than 22 years of age. Age

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

18 6 3.9 9.7 9.719 11 7.1 17.7 27.420 17 11.0 27.4 54.821 19 12.3 30.6 85.522 5 3.2 8.1 93.523 1 .6 1.6 95.224 1 .6 1.6 96.8

26 or more 2 1.3 3.2 100.0Total 62 40.0 100.0


Table 3Over 90% of the participants indicated that they were Black/African American. Less than 2% of the

participants indicated that they were either Asian, Hispanic or responded with Other respectively.Ethnic/Racial Identity -How do you describe yourself?


Valid

Black American/African American 57 36.8 91.9 91.9

Asian 1 .6 1.6 93.5Hispanic /Latino 1 .6 1.6 95.2Other 3 1.9 4.8 100.0Total 62 40.0 100.0


29

Table 4A little over 78% of students who participated in this survey were Spelman

Students. Less than 20% were Morehouse students and less than 4% were from Clark Atlanta Univeristy. No students from Interdominational Theological Center participated in the study.

SchoolFrequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Spelman 47 30.3 78.3 78.3Morehouse 11 7.1 18.3 96.7

Clark Atlanta 2 1.3 3.3 100.0Total 60 38.7 100.0


Table 5Almost half of the students who participated in completing the online questionnaire were Seniors.

Juniors were the second highest participants. Freshmen were the least likely to take the survey. Classification


Valid

Freshmen 7 4.5 11.7 11.7Sophomore 13 8.4 21.7 33.3

Junior 16 10.3 26.7 60.0Senior 24 15.5 40.0 100.0Total 60 38.7 100.0


30

Table 6

Almost 50% of student participants came from a two parent biological married family. Close to 1/4 of participants came from a Single Mother family (including an adoptive mother).

During most of your life as a child/Teen what was your Family Composition ?Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Two-parent biological married family (mother and father legally or common law married)

30 19.4 47.6 47.6

Two-parent biological cohabiting family (mother and father living together)

3 1.9 4.8 52.4

Married stepfamily (either parent remarried)

5 3.2 7.9 60.3

Cohabiting stepfamily (either parent living with significant other)

1 .6 1.6 61.9

Single-mother family (includes adoptive mother) 15 9.7 23.8 85.7

Single-father family (includes adoptive father) 1 .6 1.6 87.3

Other biological family (Grandmother, older sibling, aunt, etc)

3 1.9 4.8 92.1

Other: (please explain) 5 3.2 7.9 100.0Total 63 40.6 100.0


Table 7

31

Most students indicated that their 1st parent (Mother/Father) had receieved a Professional/Graduate Degree, Some College Education or a 4 Year College/University Degree. Only 1% of students indicated that their 1st parent got an education up to Junior High/Middle School. 16% indicated that their parents got up to an High School education.

Education Background What is your 1st Parent's Highest level Education

Completed? (MOTHER/FA...

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Junior High/Middle School

High School or Equivalent

Community

College/Vocational

School

Some College

4-Year

College/University

Degree

Professional

Degree/Graduate

School

1

10

2

14

13

21

61

.6

6.5

1.3

9.0

8.4

13.5

2.0

16.0

3.0

23.0

21.0

34.0

2.0

18.0

21.0

44.0

65.0

100.0

Missing System 94 60.6

Total 155 100.0

Table 8

32

For students’ 2nd Parent, most indicated that they either receieved a Professional Degree (35%), 4 year College/Univeristy Degree (21%). Only 2% of students indicated that their 2nd Parent received up to an Elementary education and 10% responded with “Unknown.”

What is your 2nd Parent's Highest level Education completed? (MOTHER/FATHER)

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Elementary School

High School or equivalent

Community

Some College

College/Vocational School

4-year College/University Degree

Professional Degree/Graduate

School

Unknown

1

8

8

8

11

18

6

60

.6

5.2

5.2

5.2

7.1

11.6

3.9

2.0

13.0

13.0

13.0

18.0

30.0

10.0

2.0

15.0

28.0.0

41.0

59.0

89.0

100.0


155 100.0

Table 9For this question, students used a ranking system from 1-10, indicating how much they

associated witht the political label as a “Liberial.” ( 1 being the lowest associationand and being the highest association).

For this question rank each political view point you associate with the most on a scale from 1 to...-Liberal. Most students who responded to this question, indicated that they were a 7 on the Liberial Scale (26.3%). The two second highest ranks were a 6 and 10 (14% respectively). A little less than 2% of students indicated that they were a 0 on the Liberial scale.

33


Valid

.00 1 .6 1.8 1.81.00 2 1.3 3.5 5.32.00 1 .6 1.8 7.03.00 4 2.6 7.0 14.04.00 3 1.9 5.3 19.35.00 5 3.2 8.8 28.16.00 8 5.2 14.0 42.17.00 15 9.7 26.3 68.48.00 4 2.6 7.0 75.49.00 6 3.9 10.5 86.0

10.00 8 5.2 14.0 100.0Total 57 36.8 100.0


Table 10For this question, students used a ranking system from 1-10, indicating how much they

associated witht the political label as a “Conservative.” ( 1 being the lowest associationand and being the highest association).

Out of those who completed this question, most students indicated that they were a 3 on the Conservative Scale (26.5%). Other students indicated that they were 5 or 7; which was the next most frequent response. Less than 2% indicated that they were a 9 on the Conservative scale.

For this question rank each political view point you associate with the most on a scale from 1 to...-ConservativeFrequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

PercentValid 1.00 7 4.5 14.3 14.3

2.00 3 1.9 6.1 20.43.00 13 8.4 26.5 46.9

34

4.00 4 2.6 8.2 55.15.00 7 4.5 14.3 69.46.00 5 3.2 10.2 79.67.00 7 4.5 14.3 93.99.00 1 .6 2.0 95.9

10.00 2 1.3 4.1 100.0Total 49 31.6 100.0


Table 11

For this question, students used a ranking system from 1-10, indicating how much they associated witht the political label as a “Liberial.” ( 1 being the lowest associationand and being the highest association).

Most students indicated that they were a 10 on the Feminist Scale (24.0%). Additionally, the next most frequent indicator of association to the label “Feminist” was 7 (18.0%). Only 2% students indicated they were 1 on the Feminist Scale.

For this question rank each political view point you associate with the most on a scale from 1 to...-Feminist


Valid1.00 1 .6 2.0 2.02.00 6 3.9 12.0 14.03.00 1 .6 2.0 16.0

35

4.00 7 4.5 14.0 30.05.00 2 1.3 4.0 34.06.00 9 5.8 18.0 52.07.00 8 5.2 16.0 68.08.00 2 1.3 4.0 72.09.00 2 1.3 4.0 76.0

10.00 12 7.7 24.0 100.0Total 50 32.3 100.0


b. Focus Groups

One Focus Group was conducted in Dr. Wade’s Methods of Research course on Monday, November 3rd.

The focus group consisted of all female students currently attending Spelman who were either majors/minors in

Sociology/Anthroplogy. All students within the course were either juniors or seniors from various regional places.

A seventeen item interview schedule was employed to guide the discussion which also included an analysis of

three photographs. The focus group took between 45-50 minutes to complete.

36

c. One on One Interviews

Four one on one interviews were conducted with 4 female students from Spelman College and three

male students from Morehouse College. Three female students were Sociology Majors, two were from New York

City; one was a junior and the other was a senior. The other Sociology student was a junior from New Jersey. The

last female student was a junior Psychology major from Pennsylvannia but born in Florida. Out of the three

students from Morehouse college, one was a Senior Sociology major from Brooklyn, NY and the other student

was a freshmen Appiled Physics/Environmental Engineering major from Jeffersonville, Pennsylvania. The last

Morehouse student was a Senior Philosophy major from Minneappolis, Minnesota. The two junior Sociology

majors from New York and New Jersey, came from single parent households. The junior Psychology major grew

up in a single parent household, with the biological father staying with her for a short amount of time. All three of

the male students from Morehouse came from two biological parent homes. Three of the four Spelman students

indicated that they were Christians, while the Senior Sociology major for New York indicated that she was

Agnostic. The freshmen Morehouse student from Jeffersonvile, Pa indicated that he was a Christian; while Senior

Sociology major from New York indicated that he was Muslim and the Senior Philosophy major from Minneapolis

indicated that he was an Universialist/Agnostic. Each interview took about 45 minutes to an hour, and were

recorded via iPhone Voice Memo and transcribed manually. An 17 item interview schduele was employed to

guide the discussion. Additionally, students were asked to analyze 7 photographs from online national news

publications and an 8 minute snippet of a video on the Working Poor. Some follow up questions were asked

throughout the course of the interview when needed, in order to get further clarification of each students’

thoughts. The following sections are broken down by each of the four research questions explored. Data analysis

of the data from the online question, description of students’ responses during either one on interviews or the

focus group are included in each section.

d. How does religiosity and/or spirituality among students influence how they perceive poverty?

In order to examine if religiosity and spirituality impact how students understand as well as perceive

poverty which includes how they perceive the people living in poverty, 7 scale items related to religiosity were

transformed and computed into a numerical religiosity scale for each respondent. First Reliability tests were ran

37

on the 7 item religiosity scale and 4 item spirituality scale. Both scales scored a Additionally, 4 scale items were

transformed and computed into a numerical spirituality scale. 2 tailed Spearman correlations were conducted to

explore the strength and direction of relationships between variables. There were seven questions that dealt with

perceptions of poverty which were as follows: Most poor people in the United States are people who don't

work, There should be limits on how long people stay on Welfare, There are people who deserve to be poor,

Those who are physically handicapped, disabled or widows deserve aid if they are living below the poverty

line, Those who are teen moms, single mothers with more than two children deserve aid if they are living

below the poverty line, If you are an able-bodied person, you should be able to work your way out of poverty

and If all people would just make the right decisions with how they choose to spend their money, they would

not be poor. All seven of these questions were correlated with four items on both the religiosity and spirituality

scale. These four items were as follows: My religious beliefs influence how I approach life, My spiritual beliefs

influence how I approach life, My beliefs concerning social issues are influenced by my religious affiliation and

How often do you pray?

Table 12

Only 62 students responded to the 7 questions that represent the Religosity Scale, while 63 students responded to the 4 questions for the Spirtuality Scale. The mean scale for Religiosity was 14.6129 while the mean scale for Spirituality was 7.6190. There was a large variance in scales for Religiosity versus Spiritualtiy scale.

Statistics

ReligScale SpiritScale

N Valid 62 63

38

Missing 93 92

Mean 14.6129 7.6190

Std. DeviationVariance

6.9573848.405

3.7001713.691

Table 13Most students had a scale of 9.00 (12.6%), 7.00(11.3%) 10.00 (9.7%)and 16.00 (9.7). Students were

least likely to scale either 21.0-22.0, 24.0-26.0, 29.0 and 32.0-34.0 which were all 1.6% respectively.

ReligScaleFrequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

7.00 7 4.5 11.3 11.38.00 2 1.3 3.2 14.59.00 8 5.2 12.9 27.4

10.00 6 3.9 9.7 37.111.00 2 1.3 3.2 40.3

39

12.00 3 1.9 4.8 45.213.00 4 2.6 6.5 51.614.00 3 1.9 4.8 56.515.00 4 2.6 6.5 62.916.00 6 3.9 9.7 72.617.00 3 1.9 4.8 77.418.00 4 2.6 6.5 83.921.00 1 .6 1.6 85.522.00 1 .6 1.6 87.124.00 1 .6 1.6 88.725.00 1 .6 1.6 90.326.00 1 .6 1.6 91.929.00 1 .6 1.6 93.532.00 2 1.3 3.2 96.833.00 1 .6 1.6 98.434.00 1 .6 1.6 100.0Total 62 40.0 100.0


40

Table 14Most respondents scaled at either a 4.00 (15.9%) or 5.00 (17.5%) on the

the Spirituality Scale. The next most frequents scales associated with respondents were 6.00(14.3%) and 7.00(14.3%). Students were least likely to score between 13-14 and 19-20; which were 1.6% respectively.

SpiritScaleFrequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

4.00 10 6.5 15.9 15.95.00 11 7.1 17.5 33.36.00 9 5.8 14.3 47.67.00 9 5.8 14.3 61.98.00 7 4.5 11.1 73.09.00 4 2.6 6.3 79.4

10.00 3 1.9 4.8 84.111.00 2 1.3 3.2 87.312.00 2 1.3 3.2 90.513.00 1 .6 1.6 92.114.00 1 .6 1.6 93.717.00 2 1.3 3.2 96.819.00 1 .6 1.6 98.420.00 1 .6 1.6 100.0Total 63 40.6 100.0


41

Table 15A bivariate correlation; specifically a Pearson’s correlation for ordinal level variables, was

ran for both the religiosity and spirituality scale to evaluate its relationship with the variable concerning abled bodied persons and being able to work themselves out of poverty . The Spirituality Scale had a negative correlation with the question (-0.185), while the religiosity scale had a positive correlation with the question(0.90). There was statistical significance of the correlation of the spirtualtity and religiosity scale (0.458).

CorrelationsReligScale If you are an

able-bodied person , you

should be able to work your way out of

poverty

SpiritScale

ReligScalePearson Correlation 1 .090 .458**

Sig. (2-tailed) .488 .000N 62 62 61

If you are an able-bodied person , you should be able to work your way out of poverty

Pearson Correlation .090 1 -.185Sig. (2-tailed) .488 .147

N 62 64 63

SpiritScalePearson Correlation .458** -.185 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .147N 61 63 63

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

42

Table 16A bivariate correlation; specifically a Pearson’s correlation for ordinal level variables, was ran for both the

religiosity and spirituality scale to evaluate its relationship with the following variables: Those who are physically handicapped, disabled or widows deserve financial assistance from the government if they are living below the poverty line and Those who are teen moms, single mothers with more than two children deserve aid if they are living below the poverty lined. The religiosity scale had a positive correlation with the question concerning those who are physically handicapped and disabled (0.059). However, the religiosity scale had a negative correlation with the question concerning teen moms and single mothers with more than one child (-0.216) The spirituality scale had a negative correlation with the question concerning teen moms and single mothers (-0.046), which was much less negative correlation than religiosity. However, the spirituality scale had a positive correlation with the question concerning the physically disabled, widows and handicaps concerning aid (0.646) Relgiosity was positively correlated with Spirtuality at the significance level of 0.01.

Correlations

ReligScale SpiritScale Those who are physically handicapped, disabled or widows deserve financial

assistance from the...

Those who are teen

moms, single mothers with

more than two children deserve aid if

they are livin...

ReligScale

Pearson Correlation 1 .458** .059 -.216

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .646 .091N 62 61 62 62

SpiritScale

Pearson Correlation .458** 1 .048 -.046

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .711 .723N 61 63 63 63

Those who are physically handicapped, disabled or widows deserve financial assistance from the...

Pearson Correlation .059 .048 1 .553**

Sig. (2-tailed) .646 .711 .000

N 62 63 64 64

Those who are teen moms, single mothers with more than two children deserve aid if they are livin...

Pearson Correlation

-.216 -.046 .553** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .091 .723 .000

N 62 63 64 64

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

43

Table 17A bivariate correlation was conducted using the religiosity scale, spirituality scale in order to analyze its

relationship with questions dealing with poor people working their way out of povery and limits on Welfare based on age as well as how long people stay on Welfare. A positive correlation existed between religiosity and the two questions concerning putting limits on Welfare based on age and the length of time on Welfare 0.069). However, a negative correlation is shown between religiosity and the question concerning limits on Welfare based on family type(-0.54). For the spirituality scale, negative correlations were shown between religiosity and all three questions respectively (-0.057) (-.123) and (-.198). Relgiosity was positively correlated with Spirtuality at the significance level of 0.01. Additionally, there was a positive correlation between the question concerning limits on Welfare based on age and the statement concerning most poor people being people who do not work; which was significant at the 0.05 level. Additionaly, the question concerning limits based on length of time on Welfare and family type was positively correlated with the statement concerning most poor people being people who do not work; which was significant at the 0.01 level. Lastly the two questions concerning limits on Welfare were positively correlated with a significance at the 0.01 level.

Correlations

ReligScale

SpiritScale

Most poor people in the United States

are people who don't want to

work

There should be limits on

how long people stay on Welfare based

on age

There should be limits on how long people stay

on Welfare based on family type

ReligScale

Pearson Correlation 1 .458** .193 .069 -.054

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .132 .593 .674

N 62 61 62 62 62

SpiritScale

Pearson Correlation .458** 1 -.057 -.123 -.198

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .660 .338 .120

N 61 63 63 63 63

Most poor people in the United

States are people who don't want to

work

Pearson Correlation .193 -.057 1 .316* .404**

Sig. (2-tailed) .132 .660 .011 .001

N 62 63 64 64 64

There should be limits on how

long people stay on Welfare based

on age

Pearson Correlation .069 -.123 .316* 1 .772**

Sig. (2-tailed) .593 .338 .011 .000

N 62 63 64 64 64

There should be limits on how long

people stay on Welfare based on family type

Pearson Correlation

-.054 -.198 .404** .772** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .674 .120 .001 .000

N 62 63 64 64 64**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

44

Tabel 18A bivariate correlation was conducted using the religiosity scale, spirituality scale in order to analyze

its relationship with questions dealing with deserving to be poor because of having too many children, people making the right decisions when spending their money leading to their poverty and people needing to get an education as being the source of their own poverty. The religiosity scale was positively correlated with the first two questions (0.048 and 0.043) and a negatively correlated relationship existed between the Religiosity Scale and third queston on education and poverty(-0.087). Each correlation between Religiosity Scale and all three questions were significant at levels between 0.500-0.738. However, for the Spirituality Scale, all negatively correlated relationships existed between the scale and all three questions (0.050,-0.260 and -0.257) and two of the correlations were significant at the 0.05 level. The First question’s relationship with the Spirituality Scale, was not significant at the 0.05 level; but at 0.698. Relgiosity was positively correlated with Spirtuality at the significance level of 0.01.

Correlations

ReligScale SpiritScale Some people deserve to be poor because they have too many children

If all people would just make the right decisions with how they

choose to spend their money,

they...

If all people would just get an education

they would not be poor.

ReligScale

Pearson Correlation 1 .458** .048 .043 -.087

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .712 .737 .501

N 62 61 62 62 62

SpiritScale

Pearson Correlation .458** 1 -.050 -.260* -.257*

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .698 .039 .042

N 61 63 63 63 63

Some people deserve to be poor because they have too many children

Pearson Correlation .048 -.050 1 -.058 -.060

Sig. (2-tailed) .712 .698 .648 .637

N 62 63 64 64 64If all people would just make the right decisions with how

they choose to spend their money,

they...

Pearson Correlation

.043 -.260* -.058 1 .540**

Sig. (2-tailed) .737 .039 .648 .000

N 62 63 64 64 64

If all people would just get an

education they would not be poor.

Pearson Correlation

-.087 -.257* -.060 .540** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .501 .042 .637 .000

N 62 63 64 64 64**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

45

e. How do students respond to specific images and representations of the poor in media, specifically documentaries on the Working poor and images from mainstream online news articles? (WashingtonPost, HuffingtonPost, CNN, etc)

A total of 7 images were included in the interview schedule for the one on one interviews and only 1 o the

7 images were included in the focus group. The first image was retrieved from a Huffington Post article concerning

low poverty rates and deep despair consistently experienced in other places (Grovum 2014). The photo included a

white family of four from Owsel County Kentucky , a predominately white county with the lowest middle income

in the country ($19,624)(Grovum 2014). The picture included a Mother, her two daughters and a baby in a living

room. All of the students who participated in the one on one interviews described the room as either crowded,

cluttered or clustered. Angela; junior Psychology major from Pennsylvania, described it as “ really messy” and also

noted that one of the daughters’ getting her hair done looked “really sad or bored.” This connects to the Culture of

Poverty theory, in which one the dimenisions of a culture of poverty is disorganization. Jenny; junior Sociology

major from New Jersey, said that “the room is where they do everything.” She also determined that that the

teenage girl getting her hair done was a “teen mom living with her grandma and mother.” In the following

statement Jenny discusses house crowding, socioeconomic status and education:

“And household crowding Umm. I actually did a presentation on this in Urban Sociology, just how kinda the effects of... like how household crowding is related to income. And it is related to race, but these are clearly white people who are living here and also it effects educational attainment but at the same time I mean she looks like she's a teenager and she's a teenage mom so I mean there's not much you can... I don't feel like education is a big necessity cause she's a teen mom, not saying education is not important but... “

All three of male students stated that ther was either nothing wrong with the picture, it didn’t look bad

or disturbing and it looked peaceful. Additionally, Nigel; senior Sociology major from Brooklyn,New York, stated

that “ this picture does not scream poverty to me.”

The next photo was from a Christian Science Monitor website, showcasing a black man folding his clothes

and getting ready for work. It was stated that the man in the photo used to be addicted to cocaine and heroine ,

living in abandon buildings in Baltimore. Eighteen months after being connected to a Catholic Charities through a

rehilibitation center, he became clean of drugs and is now earning $13 per hour. Most of the students in the one

on one interview stated that the man in this photo was either going/coming back from work or looking for a job.

Rebecca, the other junior Sociology major from New York, stated that “he doesn’t seem like he is in poverty.”

46

Additionally, she described him as “ a pretty wealthy guy, a successful black man.” Jenny even stated that the she

assumed since he was wearing a suite, that he worked within a business occupation. Murray, from

Minneappolis,Minneosota had the following to say about this the picture:

“I see someone persisting and trying to get out of whaterever they are in. I see a sense of worry and urgency—not stopping, pushing themselves to do better and be better despite their circumstances.”

The third photo was from a USA Today article, discussing event in New York City where participants

counted the number of individuals who are homeless (Lennihan 2014). The photo consists of a man who is

homeless, resting under a blanket at a subway station. All of the students in the one on one interviews said that

the picture was either “sad” and that the individual in the photo was ashamed or embarrassed due to the fact that

they covered their face with the blanket. Jacob, freshmen Applied Physicis /Environmental Engineering major from

Jeffersonville, PA, related the photo to the Good Sammaritan story due to the fact that there was someone passing

the man by not noticing his predicament. Additionally he stated that the man in the photo was “cut from the rest

of the world.” Murray, discussed how the man “seemed comfortable-accepting where they are and not trying to

scramble but hiding or not being noticed.”

The fourth photo was from article from The Root; discussing portrayls of poor people as either Black or

Latino and examining the fact that most poor people in America are white. Within photo, a woman and her

daughter were counting out food stamps in New York city, with two Black women behind them either looking away

or at them (Godsil 2013). All of the students could not actually describe what was going on in the picture nor

where the place where the picture was taken. Therefore, a short synopsis of the article was giving to some of the

students detailing the topic of poor whites and the SNAP program. Jacob, described the photo in the following

way: “The two Black women are looking at the white woman and thinking “I need that more than she does. Maybe

she needs it and maybe those balck women don’t need.” Murray, even stated that it looked like they “were going

camping” and that “they look good and there was a sense of order, togetherness.” Furthemore, Rebecca assumed

that “she's (older black woman) just looking at her (white woman) like she's ashamed that the lady is you know

abusing that system, knowing well that people actually need this assistance. “Jenny had the following to say about

the photo upon hearing the synoposis about the topic:

47

“Ummm... that's honestly....it's a little bothering because like I said I understand that you know you wanna teach your daughter like this is what you can buy and this is what we can't buy; but just introducing her to Food Stamps at a young age kind of is teaching her that.. that's kinda the way to survive. Like I mean what she could of done like maybe if there was a food or something that like her daughter wanted that they couldn't afford it like we couldn't afford it, but at the same time I don't think introducing her to Food Stamps at a young age is cool. Cause a lot of kids they see their parents struggle and they always say like... but they usually see their parents struggle when their at their teenage years and that's when they're like I don't wanna struggle like my mom, I want to provide for my mom.... but at the same time she's introducing this to her at a young age so it's kinda like second hand nature for the girl to you know fall back on Food Stamps.”

The fifth photo was from Huffington Post article, discussing the minimum wage debate. The photo

consisted of low wage workers rallying on Capitol Hill in Washington, urging the Congress to the raise the minimum

wage (Wing 2014). Only two of the seven students noticed that it was mostly women of different races/ethnicities

pictured protesting. Murray mentioned that they were “asserting themselves in their ask” and “ playing on the

notions of basic existence and survivial.”Everyone pointed out that the photo was concerning raising the minimum

wage. Jacob stated that

“ You can’t judge anybody—there’s people in this crowd, who should very well be in higher positions. They look like they are complaining. If you are complaining, get a better job, if you can’t get a better job; than they should raise it (minimum wage.”

Aalyiah, junior Psychology major, and Rebecaa only focused on the fact that people; regardless od race,

came together to “stand for what they believe in.” Aalyiah described one of the ladies holding the Paga Lo sign as

looking “angry.”

The sixth photo was from Slate article, which discussed how fewer the 4,000 Georgia residents receive

Welfare despite the fact that poverty is continuously increasing in the state (deMause 2012). The photo consista of

countless individuals standing outside of a soup kitchen. All students concluded that they were waiting for

something whether it was food, food stamps or shelter. Aaliyah was the only student to stated that she thougt of a

soup kitchen Rebecca concluded that they were either “waiting in line to go apply for foodstamps, to get into a

homeless shelter or to go into the unemployment office.” Additionally, she stated that there were “ a lot of white

people.” Nigel, stated that it look like they were in New York City as well as that “ It seems to be more people of

darker hues. White people are there, but they are not the majority.” Here is what Jacob had to say: It’s crazy. A lot

of people who needs to get into the shelter. Who knows what the story is behind each of the guys in the pic

standing in line.” Lastly, here’s what Jenny had to say about the photo regarding employment:

48

“I'm sad that its this many people that are homeless or without shelter, but then when I look at it I kinda question how many of these men went to find a job or look for a job so they didn't have to stand in the line anymore. Because the time that they're spending standing in line could be time their spending looking for a job.”

In the last image, was from Huffington Post article discussing President Obama and his administration

approving a federal bill to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 and the arguments against it (Bunch 2014).

The image consisted of demonstrators supporting a fast food workers protest on July 29th, 2013 outside a

McDonalds in New York City Union Square. Most of the students in the one on one interviews as well as the focus

group in Dr. Wade’s course; noted that almost of the protestors pictured were African American women. One

student, Gabby, a junior Political Science major had the following to say about the image:

“When Obama was talking about raising the minimum wage and then the stratification of wealth. Like when wage is one thing, white man get this then white and then black women get in between so all of that; but you still…Even though that’s the case; you still see women of color in this saying “Raise It!”, because even though the system is flawed there’s still an effect and there’s still a need for more income.”

One student participating in the focus group; Amanda, noted that there was a “stratification of age” in

the image. Nigel stated “Dang near all the people are African American & black—shows you whose working at

these places.” Murray had this to say about the image

“I would say people, women taking a stand. Blocking out, letting me know that they are there…That seems still like an ask, but its assertive. So its not like they’re being passive. It’s an assertive ask. A sense of unity, a sense of direction.”

Lastly, student participants in the one on one interviews were asked to watch a snippet of a NBC Full

report by Ann Curry entitle; No Place Like Home: Working Families Increasingly Homeless (2012). The full report

follows two families; Cindy and Patrick Kennard including their three kids as well as Darlene Gaynes and her three

sons. All three of the heads of households attain college degrees and Darlene was working on getting her Master’s

during the taping of this report. The Kennards became homeless due to Patrick suffering from kidney problems

which drove up medical costs even with insurance. The video attributed Darlene’s homelessness to divorce, even

with a government job she couldn’t pay her mortgage and drained out her savings. Once asked their thoughts

about the video, nearly all of the one on one interview participants either stated that the video was sad, crazy and

scary. Two of the students: Jacob and Rebbecca, stated that they have never heard of the “working poor.” Here is

what Aaliyah had to say about the documentary:

49

“It’s sad to know that the start of the first family’s downfall came from medical bills and for the second family high gas and food prices. That just makes me think how expensive it is to take care of yourself. Especially when it comes to going to hospital and buying good. Foods that are the most expensive are usually the “healthy” ones……I just don’t get why having to take care of yourself requires so much money. And it’s sad to know that you can end up homeless, just from trying to maintain a good wellbeing & take care of yourself….”

Although Murray and Nigel expressed that it was a good thing that these stories were documented and it was

transparent in unveiling people’s circumstances, yet they believed the video did not go in depth of what has truly

taken place. Nigel stated that

“You know, it is always worse for other people…..its unfortunate there’s a lot of people who didn’t make the video.There’s a lot of families that they probably won’t be able to find to document their experiences that are probably going through a much worse situation than these families are. But these are good examples of families who once had who lost after the economic change (Recession).”

Murray, on the other hand, had this to say about the video:

“I will say that the video…it brushes many surfaces. It doesn’t go in depth or offer an analysis of what’s truly taken place within this system and that being theft. People’s money and livlihood’s were stolen and how the people who stole the money asked forgiveness, but the people who had the money stolen were given no forgiveness. There loans weren’t forgiven, there bills weren’t forgiven…..yet the people who stole the money were forgiven…….So it shows the hyprocrisy and imbalance that exists in the world and in the society. It also shows the nature of us not recognizing our abuse of the world. As a country; we have yet to take responsibility for all of the wrong doings we have done and in many ways the citizens are paying for it. What I mean by that is that the very people who say “Wage Wars” and create systems abroad that disenfranchise or disempower the people, they do the same thing here in the United States……..We are repping what we have sown through our complancey and allotment of “its okay to do this to that country” and we in turn have it done to ourselves.”

The next section will analyze responses concerning the following research question: How do students

rationalize poverty? Questions included in this analysis of this particular research questions will deal with what

they think about when they hear the word “poverty”, what are poverty’s causes as well as their ideas of what

perpetuates poverty within society.

50

f. How do students rationalize poverty?

Several questions were included in the online questionnaire concerning how students rationalized

poverty. These were the following questions concerned this research question: In your opinion, which is the

bigger cause of poverty today - that people are not doing enough to help themselves out of poverty,or that

circumstances beyond their control cause them to be poor, Poor people have hard lives because social services

and benefits don’t go far enough to help them decently, In my opinion Capitalism perpetuates poverty, In my

opinon the government perpetuates poverty. Additonally these following questions were asked: Poor people

today have it easy because they can get social services and benefits without doing anything in return and Most

Poor people in the United States are people who don’t work. Below will find descriptive statistics for each

variable.

Table 19

A little over 34% of student participants Disagreed with this statement, yet 29.7% of student participants Agreed with this statement. Students were least likely to either Strongly Agree or Disagree with this statement; which were 10.9% respectively. A little over 14.1% indicated that they could neither agree or disagree with the statement.

In your opinion, which is the bigger cause of poverty today - that people are not doing enough to...-that people are not doing enough to help themselves out of poverty


Valid

Strongly Agree 7 4.5 10.9 10.9Agree 19 12.3 29.7 40.6Neither Agree nor Disagree 9 5.8 14.1 54.7Disagree 22 14.2 34.4 89.1

Strongly Disagree 7 4.5 10.9 100.0

Total 64 41.3 100.0Missing System 91 58.7

Total 155 100.0

51

Table 20More than half of studdents indicated that they Agreed with this statement, while almost 30% Strongly

Agreed with this statement. Students were least likely to indicate that they Strongly Disagreed with this statement. Only 6.3% of students indicated that they could neither Agree nor Disagree with the statement.

In your opinion, which is the bigger cause of poverty today - that people are not doing enough to...-That circumstances beyond their control cause them to be poor?


Valid

Strongly Agree 19 12.3 29.7 29.7Agree 38 24.5 59.4 89.1Neither Agree nor Disagree 4 2.6 6.3 95.3

Disagree 2 1.3 3.1 98.4Strongly Disagree 1 .6 1.6 100.0Total 64 41.3 100.0


Table 21Almost half of students Agreed with this statement, yet less than 10% Strongly Agreed with this

statement. A little over 30% of students indicated that they could neither Agree nor Disagree with the statement. Almost 6% of students indicated that they Disagreed with this statement, and less than 4% of students indicated that they Strongly Disagreed with this statement.

Poor people have hard lives because social services and benefits don’t go far enough to help them...


Valid

Strongly Agree 5 3.2 7.9 7.9Agree 28 18.1 44.4 52.4Neither Agree nor Disagree 19 12.3 30.2 82.5Disagree 9 5.8 14.3 96.8Strongly Disagree 2 1.3 3.2 100.0Total 63 40.6 100.0


.

52

Table 22A little over 40% of students indicated that they Agreed with this statement, while almost 30%

Strongly Agreed with this statement. Almost ¼ of participants indicated that they Neither Agreed nor Disagreed with this statement. Only about 6.3% of students indicated that they Disagreed with this statement

In my opinion, capitalism perpetuates povertyFrequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Strongly Agree 19 12.3 29.7 29.7Agree 26 16.8 40.6 70.3

Neither Agree nor Disagree 15 9.7 23.4 93.8Disagree 4 2.6 6.3 100.0

Total 64 41.3 100.0Missing System 91 58.7

Total 155 100.0

Table 23Almost ½ of students indicated that they Disagreed with this statement, while only clost to

19% of students indicated that they Strongly Disagree with this statement. Almost ¼ of students indicated that they Neither Agree nor Disagree with this statement. Less than 4% of students indicated that they Strongly Agree with this statement.

Poor people today have it easy because they can get social services and benefits without doing an...


Valid

Strongly Agree 2 1.3 3.1 3.1Agree 5 3.2 7.8 10.9Neither Agree nor Disagree 15 9.7 23.4 34.4Disagree 30 19.4 46.9 81.3Strongly Disagree 12 7.7 18.8 100.0Total 64 41.3 100.0


53

Table 24

Almost half of students (47.7%) indicated that they agree with this statement. Almost 1/3

of paarticipants indicated that they Neither Agree nor Disagree with this statement. Almost 14%

Disagreed with this statement, while a little over 12% of students indicated that they Strongly

Agree with this statement.

In my opinion, the Federal government perpetuates poverty

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Strongly Agree 8 5.1 12.3 12.3

Agree 31 19.9 47.7 60.0

Neither Agree nor Disagree 17 10.9 26.2 86.2

Disagree 9 5.8 13.8 100.0

Total 65 41.7 100.0


Total 156 100.0

During the one on one interviews as well as the focus groups, students were asked a number of different

questions concerning how they rationalize poverty. Those questions were as follows: Tell me about what you

know about poverty, What are some the things that come to your mind when you hear the word poverty and

What comes to mind when you think of the phrase “War on Poverty?” In response to the question concerning

students thoughts about what they know about poverty, most students during the one on one interviews and

focus group stated that poverty affects a lot of people and that its more than being homeless; associating it with a

lack of resources. Two students from both the focus gropu and one on one interviews indicated that more

minorities are impacted by poverty. Two students, Nigel and Murray, discussed poverty as a structural issue with a

Marxisit framework.

Murray had the following to say:

“Well poverty is a social construct, the conditions of poverty are based around individual or group circumstance in the confines of that society. In its true form poverty isn’t real, it’s a symptom people fall in when they don’t follow the rules of society. Society is unforgiving towards them-they place them on the margins in conditions of depravation. This feeds into misconceptions and ignorant ideas of people that don’t fall into those confines-mostly in stratified structures. U.S. capitalism is the main device of poverty; even though poverty can exist in all economic systems, its is most devisive within capitalism and is driven by other tools of segregation such as racism, homophobia, neilist and narcissitic views of one way being the only way.”

54

However Nigel had the following statement:

“Poverty is big, its big, its a lot of people in the world that's poor. Poverty is....there's different levels to poverty. Poverty here in America is not the same as poverty around the world. In other places, poverty is much more concentrated in other parts of the world especially in developing countries. Poverty is not by accident, I would say its structural there are institutions in place that contribute heavily to the amount of poverty that there is in the world. One of the main contributors to this is capitalism, globalization, the globalization of capitalism, is from what I know is a very big contributor to the amount of poverty in the world as well as here in America too...”

Additionally, during the focus group one student; Tammy a Senior Sociology major from Chicago, IL, stated that

majority of the people living in poverty are female. However during that same focus group, Gabby stated

“I think most people think of other countries and not necessarily America. They think about the commercials on TV know like Feed the Children. You see these pictures of straving children in African or something like that….And I think that’s more of a association with poverty, but just here in America there people who are hungry.”

In response to the question concerning the images that come to mind when students think about poverty,

most respondents either thought of the Homeless, Less Fortunate, Poor or social status. Elicia, the Senior

Sociology major from New York stated that she thought of “ Homelessness, minorities, food deserts, Welfare,

Governmental corruption, inequality, injustice and an uneven distribution of power and goods.” Nigel and Rebecca

both stated that they think of other countries, specifically Rebecaa referenced the commericals about Feeding

Children in African countries. However Nigel stated the following:

“I don't think of anything specific I just think of the less fortunate.. Usually when I think of poverty I don't think of America. Yes poverty exists here, but because I traveled to a couple of places and I've experienced poverty on a much more extreme level for people, when I think of poverty I think of it in the extreme and developing countries that I've been to. So yes poverty exists in America, but even so what people consider poor here you know you make under a certain amount of 1,000s dollars a year you are considered poor rather the Poverty Line. But, even that is still considerably a lot of money to some of these other peoples in other different parts o the world who are completely without.”

Murray had the following to say about what came to his mind concering poverty:

“What comes to my mind, disconnection, and a lot of times misrepresentation and inequality. It’s a kind of a very prounced problem, like that “Elephamt in the Room”in which everyone eats on. People just don’t ignore it, they eat on its back, they ride it and use it, but still they won’t call it an elephant. They’ll using it, but they won’t acknowledge that they’re using it….It (Poverty) serves an intricate part in the ways in which things are operated and constructed. I also think of a misconception of wealth. I get the feeling from others that its about material things….but when I think of poverty..its not just the stuff you have but it’s the nature of your heart and your morals…”

After responding to the previous questions, students in the focus group and one on one interviews were

then asked to comment on what came to their mind when they thought of the phrase “War on Poverty”, thus

55

in relation to Former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s legistlation and anti-poverty policies. Only two students,

Aaliyah and Jenny, could not think of anything to say about this phrase and were unable to answer the

questions. Elicia described the phrase as “People attempting to lessen the extent of poverty or eradicate

poverty .” Murray described it as

“Some government or institution within our social order that has taken on a mission to address the issues surrounding the socially constructed nature of those who live this condition of poverty. I think of it as kind a kinda pseudo adherial to a deeply rooted problem dating back to the ages of European colonialism and American antebellum slavery. So I look at it as sort of a halfwitted attempt to address the issue.

However, Nigel was the only student to actually go in depth about the War on Poverty Legislation describing

how everyone in poverty did not benefit from the legistlation and how it made things worse for some people

here in the U.S. and abroad. Further explaining his thoughts, Nigel states

“So over time, I guess, more opportunities open up and more Americans are included in the opportunities where they can get things done or have more jobs or different things like that. However, because the system wasn't always fair to begin with many minorities start behind...they already start behind in the race you understand what I'm say.. So... They never fully catch up to the privileged or to the people who always fitted the criteria to get these benefits.

Students were then asked questions concerning their views on social change concering this issues. Their

responses will be addressed in the next section.

g. What are students’ views concerning social change and action?

In order to get a sense of what students views concerning social change and action were, the following

questions were asked during one on one interviews and the focus groups: Is poverty a major social issue, What

are your thoughts about raising the minimum wage, Tell me about your political engagement Tell me about

your religious/personal views about life and how does these views impact the work that you do and Reporters

and political commentators have stated that 70% of people who are born in povery stay in poverty for the rest

of their lives: what are your thoughts about this statement? Additionaly, students responses regarding

community and civic work and reasonings behind their participation were analyzed in this section as well. When

asked if poverty was a major social issue, Aalyiah had this response:

“I think it (poverty) should be addressed. I have a passion for children so not only do I think about adults that are affected, but children as well. So starting from children and then them growing up into adults, I think it is an issue that needs to be addressed. For the future of the country, for the world

56

and that type of things. Because everything starts with the children and the youth, and if they’re growing up in that type of thing who knows what they’ll grow up to become….I know personally, me as a child, we struggled through a lot of things. one of my brothers, he always would like break out of the home and do little petty crimes and I don’t know if it was a reflection of what we were going through. But now as an adult, he’s still always getting in trouble or always getting locked up and that was ever since he was a youth.”

I asked a follow up question concerning how she struggled and she had this to say:

“Our parents were never married, so that was one thing. Our mom always trying to make ends meet, going from not having a job to barely having a job. Not a lot of money coming in, and dad coming in and out of the house, trying to struggle to eat. There was nights where I had like cereal for breakfast, lunch and dinner…Mostly not having money all the time or food all the time to eat. My dad, was the one who did work but there came a time when he left..”

Elicia stated the following:

“Yeah I think it’s a huge social issue, because there is no need for poverty. There’s tons of goods that we have, its just that the goods aren’t distributed equally. And so there’s a huge power dynamic that’s going that’s problematic. We have a right as human beings to receive resources to keep us alive and poverty hinders that.”

Diverging from how the other students responded, Murray explains that,

“It (poverty) has to be addressed not in the means of stuff. Yes people need stuff. However, If we focus on tangible things; we ignore the true value of depravation because one who has a lot of stuff can also lack the true nature of substance and that is inner self- knowing of self , mastery of self…Those who perpetuate this system of poverty they does not know themselves and they don’t love themselves..So I think if we’re going to eradicate poverty, people have to be able to come together as one both inside and out.

Students were then asked to respond to the statement concerning those born in poverty, staying in

poverty for the rest of their lives. Most all the students stated that they can believe. Two students, Elicia and

Rebecca, briefly discussed the cycle poverty as a concepting relating to this reality, which is associated with Oscar

Lewis’s culture of poverty theory and Charle Murray’s Underclass which all deal with cultural and social capital. as

one concept that relates to this statement. Jenny further said that “I believe that it is true because if that is all you

see; that is all you will be. I believe people can get out of poverty. I just takes a different mindset and the right

resources.” However, Elicia further stated after agreeing with the statement that “Poverty interconnects with

other forms of oppression. The lack of skills and knowledge to get themselves out of povery and the government is

very resistant to helping those individuals.” Yet, Jenny related this statistic to a mindset like Rebecca, but she

further expounded upon this point by stating the following:

“I think that its a mindset; I don't think that's necessarily the case. I mean I'm not saying that I'm poor, cause I'm not, but my mom had a college education but she doesn't have a degree and so she does struggle but that didnt stop my sister from coming to Spelman and graduating from Spelman and that didn't stop me from coming to Spelman. I mean, I'm not saying my sister's rich, but she's not struggling. So

57

just because you are from an impoverished background, doesn't mean that that's going to happen for you. Some people's ambition pushes them to ugh to be better than what was given to them.”

Students were asked to express their thoughts about the debate concerning raising the minimum wage.

Mostly all the students agreed that raising the minimum wage would be a good thing. Elicia stated that she believe

the minimum wage should be raised on a “a federal level, so all states have the same minimum wage.” She also

discussed how the number for the minimum wage needs to be one that “all individuals will be able to live off of

and will satisfy their basic needs.” Rebecca even had good and bad sentiments about this debate

“I feel raising the minimum wage can be a good thing. I mean like the whole thing with like the government, the tax take out; the more that you have the more they take out; so like its a very complicated and touchy issue. Sooo... I believe that'll be good for the people to you know... cause they work hard just as a lot of other people do I don't think they should not have a raised minimum wage. Everyone deserves to go up in this world.. I think you should have a chance to. “

However three students from the one on one interviews; Murray, Nigel and Jenny, expressed concern

about raising the minimum wage. Although, each of there reasonings behind their conclusions were vastly

different. Here is what Nigel had to say about raising the minimum wage.

“I think raising the minimum wage, is not really the answer to making things more fair or to fixing the economy problem you know allotting problem. But I guess people would have to work less hours to get the same amount of pay, which would maybe give them more opportunities to work other places; it could have positive affects, but I dont see it having positive effects. It would increase the amount of exploitation overseas, cause then the developing countries who are working for a quarter a day they're pay would be less probably they would be buying stuff cheaper. Unless the US finds a way to get all the goods that they get cheaper, then I don't think the minimum wage would raise anytime soon. I think there's other things that you can do that may help, but raising the minimum wage..I don't think that would really help EVERYONE. It would still create a line between the fortunate& less fortunate it would still widen that gap.”

However Murray had a slightly different take on the issue, but the same conclusion:

“I think that we have to be careful in what we ask for. When we’re asking for something, we have to know the difference between asking vs. demanding something. Cause one can be persistent in their ask, but never receive what they asked for or get what they ask for then there be a backlash by the system. For instance, with Fast Food. They’re raising minimum wage in many places, but they’re also automating the service jobs of the people. Yeah they’ll raise the wage to $15 and $16 , but they’ll have more automated positions…When you demand something, you’re also offering your solution to the problem..Your saying we expect this and then in addition if you don’t do this we’re going to do this….Whatever means of protests…..Changing legistlation, making sure the laws reflect your needs….We must demand to seek balance.”

Jenny took a slightly similar stance as Murray and Nigel, but she took a different approach in her response:

58

“I mean In a way its, I think that its good, but at the same time it can be very detrimental because the more that company has to pay, the less jobs there will be. And if you start to raise the price of how much you are paying people, the price of things that you need to get are going to raise as well. So I mean, yeah if you raise minimum wage everything else is going to go up as well so its kind of, I feel like you're going to be in the same predicament.”

Students were then asked questions about either their religious/personal views on life, the impact these

views have on the work the do or would like to do as well as concerning their political engagement. Four of the

seven students interviewed stated that they were Christians, which were Jenny, Jacob, Aaliyah and Rebecca.

Rebecca and Jenny staed she is religious and expounding on growing up in church as well as her mom being a

minister, however Rebecca and Jacob stated that she was only religious because “she believed in a religion.”

Students were also asked about their involvement community and civc work in addition to the motivations that

influenced them to become involved in this work. Aaliyah prescribed her devotion to going to church and actually

practicing what she is taught by her pastor. However, she did not believe she spiritual because she’s still growing

in her faith, and she correlated spirituality with” the relationship you have with God.” Elicia stated that she was

not a religious person, and that “I don’t believe in the institution of relgion.” Elicia discussed how she agnostic

and that she believes in a source or origin but not in a God. She stated that she is highly spiritual. Murray

however took a slightly different stance, with the same foundation. He had this to say about being religious:

Ummm, I would say when we are going into religion; we have to understand the sematics of how that word itself is intereptued. I interepret it as a habit formed- spiritual habit which includes rituals, attire, customs. We all have a religion- we just know the major religions (Christianity, Judaism, etc.) However, I do have a religion- religion of love. How I define that is based on my own constitution. I was raised Baptist, with exposure to other faith based organizations and groups. They all have ideas around their being a greater being existing all around us…I don’t think of God as a man; but as an entity – that takes forms and shapes in what it wants to express…Big religions- they influence me- inclusive of all of them- but not exclusive to all of them- they all offer something

Nigel on the other hand is Muslim, who described his faith as being the firs thing he identified with aside with

being black. He stated that he shys away from saying that he is religious. He states:

I don't like saying that I am a religious person so to speak, so I guess depending on how people define religious .. Yes I am a religious person...I like to say that I'm a little bit more spiritual than religious. Because I think religious is just like ritualistic, which can imply a lack of knowledge and understanding. Some people are very religious, but they blindingly religious followers. They follow whatever religion their parents follow, whatever religion certain people...and that's enough of them….…So I feel like those people are religious, but I feel like you accept it for yourself and when you're living what you're practicing. When you're character matches what you say you believe in, that's more spiritual and I feel like that's more in line with..at least what I strive to be. I mean I'm not one who claims a religion and just follows it blindly

Jacob, Elicia, Rebecca and Jenny all stated that they did work with the homeless either giving food to the

homeless directly at a shelther, church or community organization or at organization that packages and delivers

59

food to individals and families with low income. Jenny, Aaliyah Jacob and Rebecca spoke of past experiences that

were either at home or in the metro Atlanta area. Elicia stated that she does more work dealing with sex

trafficking and sexual violence, where most of the girls she works with who are trafficked live in poverty.

Additionally, Elicia discussed how she is going to do research on genetrification and food deserts back at home in

Brooklyn, NY. Elicia believes that “when you work with one system of oppression, you can help lower others.”

When asked about what motivates her to do the work that she does she stated:

“Just being a human being a human being. I’m very spiritual, so my spiritual belief is is that we’re all connected and have these basic rights. So if I am able to have rights and I see that others aren’t able to have the same rights, I think its my responsibility as a spiritual being and human being to make sure that they get those rigjhts.”

Nigel described his past experiences as well, specifically working internationally in Botswana dealing with

education around AIDS/HIV in areas concentrated by poverty. Additionally, he described work he has done back

at home in New York around homelessness. Murray, described work he has done around environmental issues.

Murray described he has done dealing with environmental health, food deserts, mental health and physical

wellness. Specifically his work with community organizations like the Try Community Food Coalition based in

three neighborhoods- Vine City, Ash view Heights and the AUC. Both Nigel and Murray described how their place

of privilege; whether that is from the standpoint of socioeconomic status, gender or as a college student,

provokes them to engage in work that helps those with less access to social, cultural and economic capital. Jenny

stated because she is here “ to do work for God”, that as a Christian should not judge others and that she should

give her all in all that she does. Aaliyah however had this to say about the work that she would like to do in the

community:

“Well, when I graduate I want to go into social work. I really have this desire to- now in Jumpstart- no child should feel like they are not capable of doing something – support, foundation, protection- being able to provide and show support for the wellbeing of children makes me happy. Last semester, I did work Girl Power-a mentorship and children. Anything dealing with mentorship and children as well as instilling in them “I can do what I want to do” belief. Some people are crazy, some people hurt their children- go into social work and some parents don’t know what they are doing and that strongly impacts the child. I never really tried to tie my religious views into the work that I do, as far as combing the two I never tried to place my views on the children.”

Nearly all of the students stated that they were not really involved with politics or if they were they just

pariticpated in events about voting on campus or voting canvassing events. Murray and Elicia were the only

students that mentioned they worked canvassing in the local community. Murray mentioned that he works with

60

Obam For America and has deep poltical affiliations in democratic and radical circles. Nigel, Rebecca and Elicia

expressed negative views about politics. Elicia stated that:

I’m an Independent, I don’t really believe in the political system in the U.S.. I think its highly corrupt. I do believe in the importance of people voting locally, because those decisions affect people more.”

Additionally, Nigel stated that:

I’m involved indirectly, I am not a big fan of politics. I understand that the political is person and I try to stay informed on what is happening poltically, but I don’t try to indulge to deeply around politics it causes headaches. I am not a political fan; especially being a Sociologist and understanding the negative impact of politics on human interactions.

Following this discussion of the data analysis, a summary of the results will be discussed as well as the

implications that this study will have on future research.

61

VII. Findings and Implications

Data analysis from the online questionnaire, one on one interviews and focus groups revealed that most

students have some what of a conceptual understanding of what poverty is. Especially in the sense that they

understand that poverty take very different shapes and forms within society. Meaning, that its not just

homelessness/houeslessness or strictly related to extreme poverty in other countries. Although, students

interviewed that were Sociology majors did discuss how they mostly associate poverty with extreme cases in

developing countries, yet have an understanding that poverty does exist here in the United States. This

understand association of poverty only outside the confines of the United States could have negative implications

for anti-poverty reform and efforts related to here in the U.S. due to an ill informed view of it not being “needed”

here. Those students who took the questionnaire were more likely to disagree with statements that constitute

blaming the poor for their own circumstances, there was still a divergence of what students believed were the

actual cause of poverty in the United States as well as the things that perpetuate it. Students were least likely to

answer the questions concerning the expanision of Welfare and Medicaid, which causes questions to arise about

student understanding concerning this legislation. This would have future implications on voting and policy

efforts concerning this issue. Within the the focus group, some students displayed an understanding of poverty as

a gendered and racial issue, affecting those most marginalized within society. Three to Four students in the focus

group displayed knowledge of the pros and cons of social programs; concerning social benefit programs not

going far enough.

Additionally, few of the students in both the focus group and one on one interviews described the lack

of opportunity for upward mobility for those straifited at the bottom of the economic system. A great majority of

students expressed their belief that poverty impacts minorities rather than white Americans. Most did not know

that more white Americans are poor in the United States, yet this may be due to media portyals of the poor as

always black and Latino, or students just may be uninformed. This was mostly seen during the Image response

portion of the one on one interviews, where one of the images was a White Mother in the grocery store in New

York going over food stamps. Without information given about the article from which the photo came, students

could not describe her as someone living in poverty. During the some of the one on one interviews, there was a

62

tendency of some students to prescribe people’s actions as leading to their prescribed circumstance rather than

their circumstances being the direct affect of structural causes. This connects Mike OB’rien discussion of New

Right ideals of the “Deserving and Underserving Poor (O’Brien 1997).”Additionally, that connects to Mohiyan and

Franklin Frazier’s argument of deviance (Valentine 1967). This also is directly opposite of Oscar Lewis’ thesis

concerning the culture poverty being an outward effect of capitalism (Lewis 1969). Three students within the one

on one interviews consistently took an Neo-Marxist approach of analyzing poverty, which were all of the

students who were Agnostic, Univerisalist or Muslim. Additionally, with their approach of analyzing the issue of

poverty from an conflict theorist point of view, were also peremeated with a feminist and race-centered analysis

as well as an understanding of stratification of wealth and resources. The other 3 students, whom were all

Christian, displayed empathetic ideas towards poverty and discussed it as something that should be addressed,

but not from a conflict theory approach. One student consistently discussed issue of poverty from an

individualistic viewpoint and within the frame of victimin blaming. All one on one interview participants discussed

the issue of poverty in relation to a lack access to social, cultural and economic capital. Only two of the students

in the one on one interview and one student in the focus group discussed how they were actively involved

political activities such as voter registration. Only one student stated that they actually do work consistently with

a political party. Most student participants in the one on one interviews expressed disdain and weary of politics,

describing the political party system as “corrupt” and having a negative impact on human interactions.

Religiosity and Spirituality Scales were tested for their reliability, and most students religiosity scale

ranged from 7.00, 9.00-10.00 and16.00. However most students’ spirituality scale was between 4.00-7.00.

Bivariate correlations were conducted using the religiosity scale, spirituality scale in order to analyze its

relationship with the following questions: Most poor people in the United States are people who don't work,

There should be limits on how long people stay on Welfare, There are people who deserve to be poor, Those

who are physically handicapped, disabled or widows deserve aid if they are living below the poverty line,

Those who are teen moms, single mothers with more than two children deserve aid if they are living below the

poverty line, If you are an able-bodied person, you should be able to work your way out of poverty and If all

people would just make the right decisions with how they choose to spend their money, they would not be

poor. A positive correlation existed between religiosity and the two questions concerning putting limits on

63

Welfare based on age and the length of time on Welfare 0.069). However, a negative correlation is shown

between religiosity and the question concerning limits on Welfare based on family type(-0.54). For the

spirituality scale, negative correlations were shown between religiosity and all three questions respectively (-

0.057) (-.123) and (-.198). Relgiosity was positively correlated with Spirtuality at the significance level of 0.01.

Additionally, there was a positive correlation between the question concerning limits on Welfare based on age

and the statement concerning most poor people being people who do not work; which was significant at the 0.05

level. Additionaly, the question concerning limits based on length of time on Welfare and family type was

positively correlated with the statement concerning most poor people being people who do not work; which was

significant at the 0.01 level. Lastly the two questions concerning limits on Welfare were positively correlated with

a significance at the 0.01 level

Almost all of all of the student participants in the one on one interviews had no prior knowledge of the

implications of the Affordable Care Act. One student stated that she never heard of the Act before. This has

extreme implications concerning knowledge of Healthcare Reform and it impact on students before and after

college. Future research concerning this same topic would need a random sample to discourage bias in the

sampling method, a larger sampling size to encourage generalizability of results and longer time period to conduct

a more in-depth data collection. Lastly, further study of college students ideas of social change and action;

especially African American students, is needed in order to understand what their view of change is and the ways

in which they would like this change conceived. Especially, with the heightened debate around the value of Black

Bodies and culture of poverty narratives that exist in media to further approve of the lives of black people in the

United States stripped away injusticely, with no due process.

64

VIII. Conclusion and Summary

In summary, a majority of the students in this study displayed divergent ideological viewpoints in their

description and analysis of the issue of poverty. All students believed that the poverty is wrong and that it should

not take place within society, but there was variance in what actions or events students attribute to leading to

social constructued conditions of poverty which individuals live in. There were times when students spoke of

poverty as a strictly structural issue, from a Neo-Marxist social conflict theory approach attributing poverty to the

social strafitication of society by wealth. However, there were times when students would attribute poverty to a

mindset someone may have, behavioral patterns that leads one into poverty or cycle of poverty due to the lack of

social, cultural and economic capital. The Deserving and Underserving Poor framework did come uo within

students responses as well as the questions most agreed with concerning who deserves aid and who does not;

which were included on the online questionnaire. Additionally, there were some students who were unable to

conceptualize their ideas of how poverty could be addressed, and they eventually depended solely on empathic

and altruistic perceptions of the issue rather than their thoughts concerning social change. Students were much

more likely to racialize the issue of poverty within their own responses and thoughts that came to mind concerning

the issue. Additionally, certain responses and views concerning poverty were correlated with the religiosity and

spirituality scale as well as with ideological viewpoints expressed by students, but further research must be done

to examine this phenemona more in-depth.

65

References

Amadeo, Kimberly. 2014. “President Ronald Reagan’s Economic Policies.” About News: US Economy, October

2014. Retrieved by October 23, 2014

Berg, Bruce and Lune, Howard. 2011. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Boston. Pearson

C. JI, Chang-Ho, Pendergraft, Lori, and Perry, Matthew. 2006. “Religiosity, Altruism, and Hypocrisy: Evidence

from Protestant Adolescents.” Review on Religious Research VI. 48 (2): 156-178

Carl, John D. 2010. THINK Sociology. Prentice Hall

Crunk Feminist Collective. “At Risk of Sounding Angry: On Melissa Harris-Perry’s Eloquent Rage.”Crunk Feminist

Collective, September 2012. Retrieved February 8, 2014.

(http://www.crunkfeministcollective.com/2012/09/03/at-the-risk-of-sounding-angry-on -melissa-harris-

perrys-eloquent-rage/)

DeMause, Neil. 2012. “Georgia’s Hunger Games.” Slate, December 26, 2012. Retrieved by December 6, 2014

(www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/12/georgia_s_war_against_the_poor_the_southe

rn_state_is_emptying_its_welfare.html)

Department of Health and Human Services. “Frequently Asked Questions Related to Poverty Guidelines.” Office

of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Retrieved October 9, 2013.

(http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/faq.cfm#differences)

Drier, Peter. 2004. “Reagan’s Legacy: Homelessness in America.” National Housing institute May/June 2004 (135)

Einolf, Christopher J. 2011. “The Link Between Religion and Helping Others: The Role of Values, Ideas, and

Language. “ The Sociology of Religion Vol. 72 (4): 435-455

Frankfort-Nachmias, Chava and Leon, Guerrero, Anna. 2010. Social Statistics for a Diverse Society. Newbury Park.

Pine Forge Press

Frazier, E. Franklin. 1939. “The Negro Family in the United States.” University of Notre Dame Press

Godsil, Rachel. 2013. “Hey, Media: White People Are Poor, Too.” The Root, December 2, 2013. Retrieved

December 8, 2014

(www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2013/12/most_poor_in_america_are_white.html)

http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/faq.cfm#differences

http://www.crunkfeministcollective.com/2012/09/03/at-the-risk-of-sounding-angry-on%20-melissa-harris-perrys-eloquent-rage/

http://www.crunkfeministcollective.com/2012/09/03/at-the-risk-of-sounding-angry-on%20-melissa-harris-perrys-eloquent-rage/

66

Grovum, Jake. 2014. “Low Poverty Rates Mask Deeper Despair in Many States.”The Huffington Post, September

24,2014. Retrieved December 8, 2014

(www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/deep-poverty_n_5876958.html)

Hansan, John E. 2014. “The Progressive Era.” The Social Welfare History Project, 2014. Retrieved by October 22,

2014

(http://www.socialwelfarehistory.com/eras/progressive-era/)

Hilfker, D. 2000. Poverty in Urban America: Its Causes and Cures. Washington, D.C: The Potter’s House

Bookservice.

Hounmeno, Charles. 2012. “Black Settlement Houses and Oppositional Consciousness.” Journal of Black Studies, V.

43 (6) :646-666

Jefferies, Vincent, Johnston, Barry V., Nichols, Lawrence T., Oliner, Samuel P., Tiryakian, Edward and Weinstein,

Jay. 2006. “Altruism and Social Solidarity: Envisioning a Field of Specialization.” The American Sociologist.

Vol. 37 (3):67-83

Johnson, Lyndon B. 1964. “War on Poverty Speech.” Presented at the State of the Union, January 1964.

Washington, DC

Katz, Michael B. 1990. The Underserving Poor: From the War on Poverty to the War on Welfare. New York.

Pantheon Books.

Kniss, Fred and Todd Campbell, David. 1997. “The Effects of Religious Orientation on International Relief and

Development Organizations.” Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion Vol. 36 (1):93-103

Lennihan, Mark. 2014. “Volunteers count the Homeless in New York City.” USA Today, January 28, 2014. Retrieved

December 6, 2014.

(www.usatoday.com/media/cinematic/gallery/4960207/volunteers-count-the-homeless-in-new-york-city/)

Levin, J. 2013. “The Welfare Queen. “Slate, December 13, 2013. Retrieved February 8, 2014.

(http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/linda_taylor_welfare_queen_ron

ald_Reagan_made_her_notrious_american_villian.html).

Lewis, Oscar.1966. “The Culture of Poverty.” Scientific American, Vol. 215:19-25

Marx, Karl and Engels. 1867. Capital: Critque of Political Economy. Germany. Verlag von Otto Meisner

67

Mattis, Jacqueline S. Social Production. 2009. “The Social Production of Altruism: Motivations for Caring Action in

a Low-Income Urban Community.” American Journal for Community Psychology Vol. 43 (1-2):71-84

Mills, C. Wright. 1956. The Power Elite. Oxford. New York. Oxford University Press

Murray, Charles et. al. 1990. “The Emerging British Underclass.” Choice in Welfare Series (2). London. Institute of

Economic Affairs

Nel, Phillip and Mylek, I. “Religion and relief: the role of religion in mobilizing civil society against global poverty.”

New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online Vol. 5 (2):81-97

Obrien, Mike. 1997. “Beyond Poverty and Dependency.” Jobs Letter Debate, Letter No. 57. Retrieved December 6,

2014.

(www.jobsletter.org.nz/jbl05710.htlm)

On the Issues. 2014. “Bill Clinton on Welfare & Poverty, Bill Clinton on the Issues.” OnTheIssues.org and the Speak

Out Foundation, July 2014. Retrieved by October 22, 2014

(http://www.ontheissues.org/bill_clinton.htm#Welfare_+_Poverty)

Schawbel, D.2013. “Why You Can’t Ignore Millennials.” Forbes, September 4, 2013. Retrieved February 8, 2014.

(http://www.forbes.com/sites/danschawbel/2013/09/04/why-you-cant-ignore-millennials/).

SOLMAN, PAUL. 2014. “The War on Poverty: Not Just a Liberal Campaign.” Public Broadcasting Service, January

2014. Retrieved by October 23, 2014

(http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/the-war-on-poverty-not-just-a-liberal-campaign/)

Stritt, Steven. 2014. “The First Faith-Based Movement: The Religious Roots of Social Progressivism in America

(1880-1912) in Historical Perspective.” Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare V. 41 (1 )

United States Census Bureau. 2013. Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance. Washington, D.C.:U.S. Department of

Commerce

Weber, Max. 1922. Economy and Society. 2005. Standord University Press

Wing, Nick. 2014. “17 Numbers That Will Male You Realize Just How Pathetic The Federal Minimum Wage Is.”The

Huffington Post, September 24, 2014. Retrieved November 29, 2014.

(www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/minimum-wage-increase-numbers_n_5868848.html)

http://www.ontheissues.org/bill_clinton.htm#Welfare_+_Poverty

68

Yu Chen, Shiou-Yu and Liu, Chung-Chu. 2009. “Relationships between Personal Religious Orientation and Ethical

Ideologies.” Social Behavior and Personality: Society for Personality Research: 313-320

Valentine, Charles A. 1968. “Culture and Poverty.” Chicago: University of Chicago Press

69

Appendix A. Online Questionnaire

I. Defining Poverty

1. Rank the definition of poverty you feel is most relevant from a scale of 3 to 1 (with 3 being most relevant and 1 being the least relevant)

(1) “People live in poverty when they are denied an income sufficient for their material needs and when these circumstances exclude them from taking part in activities which are an accepted part of daily life in that society." - Scottish Poverty Information Unit (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2013)

(2) “Person is considered to be living in poverty if his or her income level falls below some minimum level necessary to meet basic needs. This minimum level is usually called the "poverty line". What is necessary to satisfy basic needs varies across time and societies.” - The World Bank Organization (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2013)

(3) “ There are basically three current definitions of poverty in common usage: absolute poverty, relative poverty and social exclusion. Absolute poverty is defined as the lack of sufficient resources with which to keep body and soul together. Relative poverty defines income or resources in relation to the average.”- The House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2013)

II. Views on Policy

2. The Affordable Care Act does more to help uninsured and poor U.S. CitizensAffordable Care Act Overview

“If You Can't Afford Insurance - Medicaid will be extended to those who earn up to 138% of the Federal poverty level. That's $16,105 for an individual, or $32,913 for a family of four. However, not all states have elected to expand Medicaid, even though the Federal government will subsidize it. The main disadvantage is that the Act could increase health care costs over the short term. That's because many people will receive preventive care for the first time in their lives. This could lead to treatment of heretofore undiagnosed illnesses, driving up costs. The main advantage of the Affordable Care Act is that it lowers health care costs overall by making insurance affordable for more people. That's because insurance will be extended to two uninsured groups. First, it will include many younger people, who are healthier. This lowers costs overall because they'll pay premiums, but won't use as many services. Second, insurance will become available to people who now use expensive hospital emergency room treatments instead of going to a primary care physician.”

Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

3. The government should not expand Welfare or Medicaid because too many people abuse the System.

70

U.S. Welfare System OverviewEligibility is determined using gross and net income, size of the family, and any crisis situation such as medical emergencies, pregnancy, homelessness or unemployment. A case worker is assigned to those applying for aid. The Federal government provides assistance through TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families). TANF is a grant given to each state to run their own welfare program. To help overcome the former problem of unemployment due to reliance on the welfare system, the TANF grant requires that all recipients of welfare aid must find work within two years of receiving aid, including single parents who are required to work at least 30 hours per week opposed to 35 or 55 required by two parent families. Failure to comply with work requirements could result in loss of benefits. Most states offer basic aid such as health care, food stamps, child care assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance.”

Overview of MedicaidMedicaid- “Medicaid in the United States is a social health care program for families and individuals with low income and resources. The Health Insurance Association of America describes Medicaid as a "government insurance program for persons of all ages whose income and resources are insufficient to pay for health care.”

The government should not expand Welfare because too many people abuse the system

The government should expand Welfare The government should not expand Welfare Don’t Know

The government should not expand Medicaid because to many people abuse the system. The government should expand Medicaid The government should not expand Medicaid

Don’t Know

II. Religiosity/Spirituality Scale

4. I consider myself to be a religious person

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don’t Know

a. I consider myself to be a spiritual person?


71

5. I pray because I feel it is a way to relieve stress


a. I meditate because I feel it is a way to relieve stress


6. My religious beliefs influence how I approach life? Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don’t Know

a. My spiritual beliefs influence how I approach life?


7. Participation at my house of worship has impacted how I interact with others. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don’t Know

72

8. My beliefs concerning social issues are influenced by my religious affiliation


9. My religious beliefs influence how I approach life?


a. My spiritual beliefs influence how I approach life?


10. I put a lot of effort in carrying out my religious/spiritual beliefs in all of my dealings in life.


11. * Do you believe that religion is more burdensome than supportive?

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

12. Would you say that your mother is a religious individual Yes No

13. Would you say that your mother is a spiritual individual? Yes No

14. Would you say that your father is religious individual Yes No

15. Would you say that your father is a spiritual individual Yes No

73

16. How often do you pray? (Several Times a Day, Once a Day, Several Times a Week, Once Week

Several times a day Once a day Several times a week Once a week Less than Once a Week Never

17. How often do you attend worship services?

Once a Week More than Once a Week Once a Month Every Two or More Months Seldom Never

II. Framing Poverty as an Issue

18. Is the poverty a major social issue in the U.S? Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Disagree

19. In your opinion, which is the bigger cause of poverty today - that people are not doing enough to help themselves out of poverty, or that circumstances beyond their control cause them to be poor?

that people are not doing enough to help themselves out of povertyo Strongly Agreeo Agreeo Disagreeo Strongly Disagree

That circumstances beyond their control cause them to be poor?o Strongly Agreeo Agreeo Disagreeo Strongly Disagree

20. Poor people have hard lives because social services and benefits don’t go far enough to help them live decently.

Strongly Agree Agree

74

Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

21. In my opinion, capitalism perpetuates poverty


22. Poor people today have it easy because they can get social services and benefits without doing anything in return.


23. Most poor people in the United States are people who work but can't earn enough money


24. The Federal government perpetuates poverty


III. Perceptions of those living in Poverty

25. Most poor people in the United States are people who don't work


26. There should be limits on how long people stay on Welfare based on age, family type and how long they have been on welfare

75


a. There should be limits on how long people stay on Welfare based on family type. Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

b. There should be limits on how long people stay on Welfare based on the length of time they have already been on Welfare.


27. Some people deserve to be poor because they are lazy have too many children Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

a. Some people deserve to be poor because they are addicted to drugs/alcohol


b. Some people deserve to be poor because they are addicted to drugs/alcohol. Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

28. Those who are physically handicapped, disabled or widows deserve financial assistance from the government if they are living below the poverty line

Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree

76

Disagree Strongly Disagree

29. Those who are teen moms, single mothers with more than two children deserve aid if they are living below the poverty line


30. If you are an able-bodied person, you should be able to work your way out of poverty


31. If all people would just make the right decisions with how they choose to spend their money. Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

a. If all people would just get an education they would not be poor


32. Compared with 10 years ago, do you think it is easier today or harder today for a person to start out poor, work hard, and to get out of poverty?

Easier Somewhat Easier Somewhat Harder Harder

33. What income level, per year, do you think makes a family poor?

$0-$4,999

77

$5,000-$$9,999 $10,000-$14,999 $15,000-$19,999

34. What do you think is the least amount of money a family of four can get by on in a year?

$0-$4,999 $5,000-$9,999 $10,000-14,999 $15,000-$19,999 $20,000-$24,999

35. Do you engage in community service, civic work or social justice activities that deal specifically with poverty?

Yes No

a. If Yes, How often do you participate in these activities?

1-2 hours per week 3-5 hours per week 6-8 hours per week 9-11 hours per week 12 or more hours per week

b. If yes, what motivated you to get involved in these activates?

Requirement for grade/year in school Social Responsibility Concern for the Welfare of Others Resume BuilderPersonal Beliefs: Please Specify Below

Other: Please Specify

78

I. Demographics

1. Age:

2. Gender:

3. Ethnic/Racial Identity -How do you describe yourself? Check all that apply

American Indian/Native American Asian

Black/African American Hispanic Latino

White/Caucasian Pacific Islander

Other

4. School:

Spelman

Clark Atlanta

Morehouse

ITC

Morehouse School of Med.

5. Classification:

Freshman

Sophomore

Junior

Senior

Graduate Student

Other: _________________________(please specify)

6. What is your current major and/or minor? Check all that apply and indicate minor African Studies/ African Diaspora & World Anthropology Art and Art History Asian Studies Chemistry Chinese Gender Studies/Comparative Women’s Studies Computer Science & Information Dance Drama Economics Education Engineering English Environmental Science French History International Studies Management & Organization Mathematics Music Philosophy Physics Political Science Psychology Sociology

7. Marital Status

79

Single

Engaged

Married

Separated

Divorced

Widowed

8. Employment Status

Self-employed

Employed part time

Employed full time

Unemployed, seeking

Unemployed, not seeking

Retired

Disabled

Other: ______________(please specify)

9. Family Composition Who raised you:

Two-parent biological married family (mother and father legally or common law married)

Two-parent biological cohabiting family (mother and father living together)

Other two-parent family (two mothers, two fathers family)

Married stepfamily (either parent remarried)

Cohabiting stepfamily (either parent living with significant other)

Single-mother family (includes adoptive father)

Single-father family (includes adoptive father)

Foster or non-related guardian (may include group home settings)

Other biological family (Grandmother, older sibling, aunt, etc)

Other: _______________________(please explain)

10. Education Background

Mother/Father (Highest level completed)

Elementary

80

Junior High/Middle School


Community College/Vocational School

Some College


Professional Degree/Graduate School

Unknown

Father/Mother (Highest level completed)

Elementary

Junior High/Middle School


Community College/Vocational School

Some College


Professional Degree/Graduate School

Unknown

81

Appendix B. Interview Schedule, Images and Video Link

1. Tell me about what you know about poverty?

2. What are some of things that come to mind when you hear the word “poverty”?

3. What comes to mind when you think of the phrase “War on Poverty”?

4. Is poverty a major social issue to you? a. -Why or why not?

5. Reporters and political commentators have stated that 70% of people who are born in poverty stay in

poverty for the rest of their lives; what are your thoughts about this statement?

6. Recently there has been debate about raising the minimum wage, tell me your thoughts about this?

7. Would you say that you are a religious person?

8. Tell me your thoughts about Welfare Programs such as the SNAP, Temporary Assistance for Needy

Families, Head Start or Housing Assistance?

9. What do you think about this following statement, “The government should not expand Welfare or

Medicaid because too many people abuse the System.”

10. Tell me your thoughts about this statement, “Poor people today have it easy because they can get social

services and benefits without doing anything in return.”

11. How do you feel about the Affordable Care Act (I.E. Obamacare)?

12. Have you engaged in civic work related to reducing the impact of poverty?

a. If so, could you tell me about these experiences?

b. What motivated you to become involved in these programs?

13. Would you say that you are a spiritual person?

14. According to the Center for American Progress; Black and Latina women face higher rates of poverty and

are at least twice as likely as white women to be living in poverty.” What are thoughts about this statistic?

15. Tell me about your religious/personal views about life?

16. How do these views impact the work that you do?

82

17. Tell me about your political engagement? (If any?) * VOTER REGISTRATION, DEMONSTRATION/CAMPAIGN (PARTICIPATION IN THE INSTITITION, ZERO RIGHT IN ON THE ACTIVTIES STUDENTS ARE INVOLVED IN ( RAISE THE WAGE, MICHAEL BROWN)*

a. Images

83

84

YouTube Video Link for NBC’s “No Place like Home”

http://youtu.be/MdbHEZp0WPA

http://youtu.be/MdbHEZp0WPA

Ama Yates-Ekong Senior Thesis (4)

Documents

students views

sociology thesis advisor

senior thesis

research questions

research design

bruce wade reader

partial fulfillment

graduation requirements