Question 7: The achievement gap seems to hit hardest at students of color. Did that program at Harvard take a close look at the color line?

In the policy discussions surrounding the achievement gap, several citizens have pointed out that the way we define the issue can stigmatize students. The way the State defines the AG is:

The disparity between various demographic groups of students is commonly referred to as the “achievement gap.” In actuality, a number of different gaps exist that result in this phenomenon of low achievement. These include an opportunity gap, resource gap, readiness-to-learn gap, and a preparation gap of teachers constituting an overall education gap. (taken from this document. ) This is an improvement over an earlier definition.

Why does this matter? Here is an example. In one presentation to the Tacoma school board, a presenter began with data about the changing composition of district students, categorized by color and ethnicity, with one bar in the charts representing the proportion of African American students—as in, when the district was mostly white, the achievement gap was less of an issue. The presenter did not say this directly, but that was the order of presentation. Why construct it that way? Do we know there was no achievement gap 25 years ago? Would it make better sense to start with the changing composition of students with regards to the proportion growing up poor—and, do we know how the present compares with 25 years ago with regards to growing up poor? We don’t know any of those things, and yet African American students are offered front and center as an example of the problem.

Here is another example. In a discussion among the Tacoma school board and district administrators, during a study session, several people referred to ways of thinking about the achievement gap. Most of the discussion was about abstract terms—state standards are going up, we want all students to match the higher standards, the ‘catch up’ needed by the lower achieving studentss is an additional challenge—but when we get specific about serving particular students, more than one person referred to doing something about the performance of African American students. A member of the audience rose to ask the Board about this, and advised them to avoid aggregating all these categories—income levels, color, and so on—because it seemed to define the problem as African American students can’t learn, even to suggest that those who do succeed are somehow overcoming inherent limitations.

In short, we often do stigmatize students by the way we define problems. And this can allow us to sidestep the basic issues, and think of the problems, however subtly, as someone else’s. Maybe the achievement gap seems to hit hardest at students of color because that’s what we are looking for.

Did that Tacoma group that went to the program at Harvard hear about this? Did the program clarify the way we conceive of the color line? Briefly, Yes, and No.

The No part: While many documents in program participants’ binders discussed the achievement gap, this reader saw only one direct reference to the role of racism. The author* of that piece describes how racism deprived people of opportunities to get an education, and relates a beautiful story of how a caring adult helped a child overcome its legacy. But then the author leaps to a level of abstraction that strips the stories of their power, and lets him off the hook of having to mention racism again (sample: “the explication of the critical importance of situative and tacit knowledge referable to content and procedure….” Fairly soon (p. 332) he gets to “hegemonic culture” and “subaltern relationship” (he read Bourdieu at some point—Baldwin is a bit more direct about the American experience).

The Yes part: Two resources at the achievement gap program let participants know we have to look squarely at the color line, be clear about its role in the achievement gap, and avoid destructive but common assumptions about why some students, particularly African American students, succeed at lower rates.

One of the people who stressed this was Ronald Ferguson, who spoke on “The Persistence of Achievement Gaps and How Families, Communities, and School Leaders Can Help Close Them.” Ferguson says the achievement gap is in large part the result of unequal educational and socioeconomic opportunities, mapped closely by the color line. Here is a list of policy implications, from a paper he wrote some years ago.

The participants in the Harvard program were also asked to read a chapter by Pedro Noguera. In another piece that summarized that chapter he wrote this (one reference omitted):

My own experience working with urban schools leads me to believe that any serious policy for improving urban public schools must address the educational issues in concert with a broad array of social issues, such as poverty, joblessness, the lack of public services, etc. Such an approach has not been attempted on a mass scale since the Great Society programs of the 1960s, and under the present paradigm of neo-liberalism, there is little likelihood that such a comprehensive effort will be launched again in the near future.

Absent the political will to support the re-creation of social welfare programs and social investments that would spur development in economically depressed urban areas, it may still be possible that social reforms can be initiated which can bring gradual and concrete improvement to conditions in the inner city. Such an approach must focus centrally on the development of social capital through the improvement of urban public schools. Specifically, the goal must be to transform urban schools into sources of social stability and support for families and children by developing their potential to 1) serve as sources of intra-community integration, and 2) to provide resources for extra-community linkages.

You might also want to check out the Washington State Commission on African American Affairs, which publishes an Education page. Check the bars on the left for their the achievement gap, dropout rates, and so on.

*Edmund W. Gordon, “The Idea of Supplementary Education,” in Edmund W. Gordon, et.al., Supplementary Education: The Hidden Curriculum of High Academic Achievement (Rowman & Littlefield, 2005), pp. 320-334.