The countryside offers no escape from the social and economic pressures that lead kids to do poorly in school, a study suggests.
A study that surveyed school officials in 312 rural, urban and suburban districts last year cast doubt on the popular image of rural children leading wholesome, trouble-free lives compared with youngsters in crowded communities.The study asked officials to estimate the percentage of their students who fit into one or more of a dozen risk categories, including involvement in crime, sexual activity, drug or alcohol abuse, depression, child abuse, poverty or parents who are substance abusers.
Rural children fared worse than non-rural children in 34 out of 39 statistical comparisons, according to the survey by the National Rural Development Institute based at Western Washington University.
The report thus suggests that the social and economic strains facing rural schoolchildren are every bit as bad, and perhaps worse, as those facing city youngsters.
Isolation and rural customs are partly to blame, said Doris Helge, executive director of the institute based at Western Washington University, in Bellingham, Wash.
"A lot of it is attitude," Helge said in a telephone interview. "Sexual activity and dropping out of school is not that unusual in rural settings. There's an acceptance of low self-esteem. A kid has to be really deviant to get any attention."
A draft of the study, which also compared the state of students with mental and physical handicaps to that of non-handicapped children, was made available to The Associated Press.
There are brighter spots on the rural landscape, notably in Minnesota, North Dakota and Iowa, where residents have long put high value on education and completing school.
But Helge, an authority on rural education problems, said rural children with handicaps or psychological problems may fare worse than others because isolated communities often lack social services to address their needs.
Among the survey's findings:
-17.7 percent of non-handicapped rural high school students were estimated to be substance abusers, compared with 10.1 percent in non-rural districts.
-12.3 percent of non-handicapped rural elementary schoolchildren were found to be suffering depression, compared with 10 percent of urban and 8.5 perecent of suburban youngsters. Among mildly handicapped youngsters, depression was a problem among an estimated 16.9 percent of rural grade-schoolers but only 9.5 percent of urban and 12.4 percent of suburban pupils.
-25.7 percent of non-handicapped rural high school students were considered sexually active, compared with 22.5 percent of urban and 20.9 percent suburban students. Among mildly handicapped rural high schoolers, 26.7 percent were sexually active, compared with only 15.3 percent of urban and 18.2 percent of suburban children.
-6.7 percent of non-handicapped rural middle school youngsters were said to be involved in crime, compared with an estimated 5.6 percent in urban and suburban schools.
-12.7 percent of preschool-age rural youngsters without handicaps were considered victims of child abuse, compared with 11.9 percent in urban and 9.6 percent in suburban districts.