This is definitely a big advantage Alexander had that probably contributed to his college success and acceptance to an Ivy league school. Students whose parents attended college automatically can receive some basic guidance on university logistics (ie application support, career guidance, etc). They are also more likely to have familial support in choosing to go to university since their parents did and have experience there. Other children might be under more pressure from families and adults in their lives to go straight to work or get a job right after graduating high school.

I could see why the author may have took offense to the term "that" being used to describe the population of students at the school. It is dismissive, and almost others the population of students at the school, by labeling them as different from the "normal" or "typical" student bodies at other more affluent high schools. There is a largely negative connotation towards these students categorized as low-income in an urban classroom setting.

This passage shed light on an interesting idea. Even though both of Alexander's parents felt that there may be racial prejudice in the school, Alexander's mom, Ms. Williams argued that Mr. Williams should not voice these concerns around Alexander. I could see how even if there was a concern about prejudice, Ms. Williams wanted Alexander to have an open mindset. She nonetheless kept a commitment to vigilance, as did Mr. Alexander.

I did not previously think about how age impacts the way you experience poverty, but I can see how this may be true. When we are little kids, we are still unaware of a lot of the different facets of identity that set us apart, and are more likely to be open minded to more things-- we are still very easily impressionable. As we become older though, and cliques form, there is a way clearer understanding of what may be deemed as cool or desirable for teenagers and what is embarrassing or something to be ashamed of.

To me this passage ties back to flawed pedagogical structures in k-12 schools; so often the academics and even fun seeming extracurricular activities are tailored to a white middle class (nuclear families). They do not seem to be inclusive or take into consideration that certain children may not have or live with fathers, and that a Father's Day activity might not feel right to them.

I thought this was a very interesting point! I can absolutely see the way that certain school cultures can shape a student's understanding of their capabilities or influence them to think they fit into a certain mold. I think there is definitely room for reform in these types of pedagogical structures and biases. Empowering students in underprivileged schools could be great way to help them realize their full potential and not feel as stuck in a box of label as being low SES.

This finding makes a lot of sense to me-- over 1/3 of families living in poverty experienced six or more risk factors. Thus, with risk factors happening, poverty a lot more likely to occur ( this made me think back to situational poverty, and how one risky or unpredictable situation can land an individual in poverty so quickly). I think all of the risk factors-- emotional and social challenges, acute and chronic stressors, cognitive lags, and health and safety issues-- can become escalated and have the potential to result in a family being in poverty.