Underachievers, in Schools

Little consensus exists in the educational literature about the definition of underachievement, particularly concerning how it is measured or to whom it applies. Yet the term is used often by academics, practitioners, journalists, and politicians somewhat indiscriminately in describing poor academic performance in school without any clarity about to what the underachievement relates. At times underachievement refers to the relationship between an individual's perceived innate ability to learn and actual learning performance, while at other times it refers to comparisons between an individual's performance with that of a larger group. The lack of a universally accepted definition of underachievement in the literature requires the presentation of an operational definition in this context. Hence, underachievement is defined here as a discrepancy between expected and actual academic achievement by an individual, particularly among those students who possess the cognitive ability to achieve at high levels.

The term underachievement appears to have been used initially within the literature about students identified as academically gifted (i.e., those perceived to have high learning potential) whose performance in school (usually measured by grade point averages, sometimes measured by behaviors) falls below anticipated achievement. Despite evidence of the existence of underachieving students among those identified as having high learning potential, prior to 1980 there existed almost no substantive research on the topic of gifted underachievement. Reasons cited in the literature tended to focus primarily on the individual student and issues unrelated to school: (a) poor family relationships, particularly between father and son, (b) low self-image or self-concept, often generating feelings of nonacceptance by peers and social isolation, and (c) asocial personality traits and blaming others for poor performance. Male students generally were perceived more likely to become underachievers than female students. These notions of underachievers in schools tended to place the burden of responsibility on the students or families or on academic performance and behaviors associated with one gender.

Through her school-based case studies of gifted students, Joanne Whitmore, in 1980, was the first to identify school-based influences contributing to underachievement: (a) students' perception of a lack of genuine respect by teachers, (b) competitive social climate among students, (c) inflexibility and rigidity of curriculum and instruction, (d) emphasis on evaluation by others, (e) negative comments by teachers about students failing to achieve or conform, (f) constant teacher control over classroom activities, and (g) students' perception of unrewarding curriculum based almost solely on textbook learning. She also found that teachers rarely considered the roles that curriculum, instruction, assessment, and their own behaviors as influencing conditions that can lead to student underachievement.

Initial indicators of underachievement are often manifested in late elementary grades by student behaviors and attitudes such as unfinished work, disorganization, excuses for forgotten assignments and homework, uninterest in most academic subjects, and descriptions of school as boring or useless. Children who are hyperactive, rebellious against authority, highly critical of others, physically undercoordinated, and [Page 1038]socially isolated by peers suffer from low self-esteem and chronic inattention. Over time these behaviors and attitudes lead to poor study habits, lack of perseverance, procrastination, and use of external escapes (e.g., video games, social life, drugs) that support a student's energies toward learning avoidance. Prolonged illness, emotional stress caused by family changes, perceived academic inabilities based upon race or language, and learning difficulties requiring differentiated services also contribute toward fostering underachievement.

...