The New York Times features a new study of the intersection of race, family income, and test scores by Sean Reardon, Demetra Kalogrides, and Kenneth Shores.
It shows beyond doubt that family income and test scores are tightly correlated. A chart of educational attainment in school districts, arrayed by family income, shows that: “Sixth graders in the richest school districts are four grade levels ahead of children in the poorest districts.”
That is a huge test score gap.
We’ve long known of the persistent and troublesome academic gap between white students and their black and Hispanic peers in public schools.
We’ve long understood the primary reason, too: A higher proportion of black and Hispanic children come from poor families. A new analysis of reading and math test score data from across the country confirms just how much socioeconomic conditions matter.
Children in the school districts with the highest concentrations of poverty score an average of more than four grade levels below children in the richest districts.
Even more sobering, the analysis shows that the largest gaps between white children and their minority classmates emerge in some of the wealthiest communities, such as Berkeley, Calif.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; and Evanston, Ill. The study, by Sean F. Reardon, Demetra Kalogrides and Kenneth Shores of Stanford, also reveals large academic gaps in places like Atlanta and Menlo Park, Calif., which have high levels of segregation in the public schools….
Why racial achievement gaps were so pronounced in affluent school districts is a puzzling question raised by the data. Part of the answer might be that in such communities, students and parents from wealthier families are constantly competing for ever more academic success. As parents hire tutors, enroll their children in robotics classes and push them to solve obscure math theorems, those children keep pulling away from those who can’t afford the enrichment.
“Our high-end students who are coming in are scoring off the charts,” said Jeff Nash, executive director of community relations for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools.
The school system is near the flagship campus of the University of North Carolina, and 30 percent of students in the schools qualify for free and reduced-price lunch, below the national average.
The wealthier students tend to come from families where, “let’s face it, both the parents are Ph.D.s, and that kid, no matter what happens in the school, is pressured from kindergarten to succeed,” Mr. Nash said. “So even though our minority students are outscoring minority students in other districts near us, there is still a bigger gap here because of that.”
By contrast, the communities with narrow achievement gaps tend to be those in which there are very few black or Hispanic children, or places like Detroit or Buffalo, where all students are so poor that minorities and whites perform equally badly on standardized tests….
What emerges clearly in the data is the extent to which race and class are inextricably linked, and how that connection is exacerbated in school settings.
Not only are black and Hispanic children more likely to grow up in poor families, but middle-class black and Hispanic children are also much more likely than poor white children to live in neighborhoods and attend schools with high concentrations of poor students.
One school district stood out as a district that beat the odds: Union City, New Jersey.
David Kirp wrote a book about Union City, called Improbable Scholars: The Rebirth of a Great American School System and a Strategy for America’s Schools.
What did they do in Union City? Time to read Kirp’s book and start implementing real education reform.
Or read an article by Kirp about what he discovered. No charter schools. No Teach for America. Steady work, careful planning, collaboration, no heroics.
Interesting article. I would like to see the data broken down by parent education level. This study seems to define SES by income level, but SES can be defined by education level as well. Generally, adults with higher education levels will have, on average, higher incomes than those with lower levels of education. I can imagine ways in which these results, tracking by race &. income can be confounded by exceptions that might be caught if tracked by race & parent education level. I also think parent education level would have a more relevant impact on a child’s performance than income.
wdf1
I found this at the bottom of the article, whisper type:
Note: Socioeconomic status captures income, the percentage of parents with a college degree, the percentage of single parents, poverty, SNAP and unemployment rates.
Charter schools are included in the local school districts where they are located.
I did not find a specific graphic or commentary for parent education. Only math and ELA scores, as usual, with NAEP scores a tool for jiggering differences among the actual tests used by states.
Hope to see more on these interrelationships; income, the percentage of parents with a college degree, the percentage of single parents, poverty, SNAP and unemployment rates.
Achievement tests by design contrast test takers against top performers and the top are wealthier n more able to answer questions beyond the grade level curriculum. If we used criterion referenced tests, more students would do well and better diagnostics would be available for teachers. Ask what is the purpose of the test or what is the test designed to measure? A test used for the wrong purpose invalidates the conclusions. Are SAT, ACT, LSAT and IQ scores highly related to wealth and the levels of academic support that wealth offers outside the school? Do we use these tests to select the highest performers for special opportunities? Is this fair? Should we have a social caring and empathy test associated with achievement tests? Is specific knowledge of a curriculum important and should this knowledge be measured with criterion referenced tests? Really, what character and values and skills do we hope to cherish and preserve in our schools?
Criterion referenced standardized tests suffer the same inherent errors, falsehoods and psychological fudges that standardized norm referenced test do. The psychometricians just hide that fact a bit better by the chosen name. The fact is that all the questions individually are “norm refernced” meaning each question’s answers have to follow a bell curve distribution as those questions are supposedly good sorters and separators of the testee population.
Don’t believe the BS about “criterion referenced tests”.
Señor Swacker: as you point out, CRTs [Criterion-ReferencedTests] are meant—like just their NRT [Norm-ReferencedTest] counterparts—to label, sort and rank.
John Kuhn in MORE THAN A SCORE (2014, Jesse Hagopian, ed., p. 246) has a pointed and succinct description of how the all-important cut score is determined for CRTs—
“A cut score really has only one use: to engineer a desired political outcome.”
Given the precision with which high-stakes standardized tests can be designed, produced, and pretested to meet the pass/fail requirements (within very narrow margins of error) of those buying or renting them, an apt if damning description.
And that doesn’t even deal with the “metaphysical excuse” (as Son of Non Sequitur would put it in a vain attempt to deflect and avoid) of whether or not the darned things measure what they purport to measure accurately and fairly, or measure what’s worth measuring, or even measure anything at all besides the patently useless ability to get more or less points on a standardized test while squandering (on an increasingly grand scale) precious teaching and learning time and effort and money.
As you point out, just another of rheephorm’s verbal hide-and-seek games.
Thank you both for your comments.
😎
After reading Kirp’s article about Union City, I decided to looked the district up on the “Great Schools” website. Despite all their accomplishments, they received a 3 out of 10. As I have said before, their rating system seems to correspond to socioeconomic levels of those in the school district.
I taught in a school district that was diverse and had about 30% free and reduced lunch.
My school received a Blue Ribbon, and I recall that we were commended for how much our school had reduced the score gap for minority students. With or without any ribbons, it was and is a wonderful school. What Kirp describes in Union City sounds very similar to what worked in our elementary school. We had lots of integrated learning across curricular areas, and we were always looking for those “teachable moments” that made connections and promoted further investigation and discovery. Our reading and writing were authentic and across curricula.
It is good to see the “New York Times” writing some reality based views on education. It is a departure from their usual cheerleading for charters.
“The data was not uniformly grim. A few poor districts — like Bremen City, Ga. and Union City, N.J. — posted higher-than-average scores. ”
The reporter has inaccurate data.
Bremen City, GA has a population of 6000. Bremen High is 93 percent white, 4 percent black, 1 percent Asian, and 22 percent low-income. It is not a poor district. http://www.schooldigger.com/go/GA/schools/0051002455/school.aspx
From 2011-2014 Union City High School only performed better than 20 percent of the high schools in the state of New Jersey. However, in 2015 it performed better than 71 percent. Either the 2015 test scores were incorrectly entered or there was cheating.
Landry Walker High School in New Orleans was caught cheating on computerized exams, so it can be done. http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2016/02/landry-walker_cheating_investi.html
It is impossible for a school (Union City) that is over 90 percent low-income and over 90 percent Hispanic to be better than 70 percent of high schools in the state. http://www.schooldigger.com/go/NJ/schools/1638003059/school.aspx
Only 14 percent of the students at Union City High took an AP exam and of those only 56 percent managed to pass at least one exam. I guarantee you most, if not all, took AP Spanish. Neither Union City nor Success Academy have a secret sauce. http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/new-jersey/districts/union-city-school-district/union-city-high-school-12783/test-scores
Triumph104,
For 2015, are you considering PARCC or HSPA results?
NJ DoE website’s Technical Report NJ HSPA Spring 2015, dated Feb 2016 says: “The population of examinees taking the 2015 HSPA Assessment consisted of students who were retesting after previously scoring below the state’s graduation testing requirement.”
NJ changed from HSPA to PARCC in 2015; not sure how to compare 2014 to 2015 results for any district.
Triumph104,
One factor influencing the fact that “only 14 percent” of Union City High School students took an AP test could be that magnet Hudson County Technical Schools with competitive admission enroll students interested in their architecture, medical science, science programs. When I see very high percentages enrolled in AP, I question whether the purpose of AP has been diluted.
“Wait, what?”
No heroics, TFA
Charter schools or testing day.
Steady work, collaboration —
Leading us to ruination
“Children in the school districts with the highest concentrations of poverty score an average of more than four grade levels below children in the richest districts.”
Putting aside the problems with these tests, what the authors have stated, albeit perhaps in a clearer fashion than some before is nothing new. We’ve known this for decades.
Now the takeaway is not that we should attempt to raise test scores for the lower SES but that we should provide the services that are needed to help each child learn as much as he/she and his/her parents see fit. This country has more than enough wealth to do so many times over but our priorities are all screwed up (I’m being nice) with a focus on death and destruction dominating over life and living. I am not encouraged that I will see a change in that attitude in my life.
“If college tests are the “real thing”” Well they’re not the ‘real thing’ either, eh!
AMEN!
It seems the insularity of the dia(b)logue rests on avoiding an
inconvenient conclusion, exposed by Wilson.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”.
Wilson has cracked the “code”, as have many others , throughout
history. What do we hear?
The “dog whistle” effect of concocted results, myths, and slogans.
Look here, look there. Pitch the result du jour in support of
foundational illusions. Continuing to articulate the function with ideology, in place of the results (division of the spoils), is a ride on
the Emperor’s ferris wheel.
Back where we started, here we go round again…
In the meantime, Audrey Amrein-Beardsley at VAMBOOZZLED headlines this news:
“Virginia SGP” Wins in Court Against State.
This case repeats the intended shaming of teachers practiced by the LA Times. Got to Vamboozeled first, then see http://loudounnow.com/2016/04/26/judge-sides-with-loudoun-parent-seeking-teachers-names-student-test-scores/
This is one school district, one of the wealthiest, with one parent who is determined to see teachers rated by Student Percentage Growth scores, as if these scores are valid, necessary and sufficient to judge all teachers, every grade and subject.
This brings to mind a suggestion for Virginia SGP and the judge in Loudoun County. Since there is no doubt about the significant influence of parent/guardian income, and education, and employment status, and eligibility for SNAP etc, on student test scores, how about publishing the names of parents/guardians according to the ranking of their children on test scores? After all, this study by Sean Reardon, Demetra Kalogrides, and Kenneth Shores adds to the abundant research, dating back to the mid-1960s Coleman Report that teachers have less influence on test scores than parents/guardians.
Virgina SGP gets $35,000 for court costs, presumably from the public school budget.
Laura H. Chapman: thank you for the info and the link.
A small reminder: this is the same logical thinking and consistent rheephorm advocate whose passion for Michelle Rhee had him place her above (according to him) the great civil rights leader Arne Duncan—even when he eviscerated in detail her oft-claimed marvel of taking “her” [forget that pesky co-teacher!] students from the 13th to the 90th percentile. But not matter that he himself proved her a shameless and clumsy fraud, his unrequited adoration of her continues unabated to this day.
So how does this square with his putatively ferocious stand against bullying?
Same old same old. Forget logic and consistency. It’s all about the beat down and $tudent $ucce$$.
Makes ₵ent¢.
Rheeally! And in the most Johnsonally sort of ways too…
But not really.
😎
Unfortunate, but not surprising.
Most judges are woefully lacking in the knowledge required to make a determination on the merits (or lack thereof)
SGP’s were never intended to be used to evaluate teachers and to use them for that purpose is either ignorant or dishonest.
Seems to me all of us on this blog and others where we have been subjected to Virginia’s blather ought to be compensated for our inconveniences.
He knows not what he does.
A highly intelligent parent with means outraged by a system.
Still no reason to behave like an abusive twit for such a long period of time. It’s one thing to lose it and/or lash out for a while, but at some point you deal with reality and truth, not fake it or distort it so you can continue life through a perverted prism.
Wouldn’t it be great if Some Goofy Poster devoted energy to supporting teachers in pursuing professional activities they deem worthwhile? And, if his attorney donated fees to Donors Choose.
If I may append your thought SDP:
“SGP’s were never intended to be used to evaluate teachers and to use them for that purpose is either ignorant or dishonest AND UNETHICAL!”
We will not even begin to solve the achievement gap until we respond to the research of over fifty years: A child’s level of academic achievement is closely related to the educational and economic background of his parents.
Many people say, “Well, it is hopeless to do anything about the family” but that is not true. We can see what advantaged children have (careful prenatal monitoring, lots of early language interaction, high-quality preschools, good healthcare, stimulating summers, etc.) and try to provide some of these advantages to all children. Also, we can work towards subsidized housing in all communities and open enrollment in all tax supported schools. Perhaps the gap will never fully disappear, but we can narrow it if we choose to do so.
And yes, maybe we can have small schools, experienced teachers, small classes (1-15) for our most needy children.
Yipes, did Jeff Nast, Executive Director of Community Relations Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools, actually say, “Our high-end students …”? Hint: “more-affluent students” would be better word choice. Are the other students in his district supposed to look in the mirror and say, “I’m a low-end student”? I thought the term high-end referred to commodities, not people.
Community Relations in his district must be cozy if he feels “both the parents are Ph.D.s, and that kid, no matter what happens in the school, is pressured from kindergarten to succeed.” Again, word choice. Maybe that kid is “encouraged” or “nurtured from early childhood to succeed”?
Reblogged this on Dern's Discourse and commented:
This states what those of us in education already know. It’s about time it made news
Homework for Bill Gates and his cabal of avarice worshiping fools: Read the book or the New York Times piece or both.
Income level of parents is just one partial predictor of a students standardized test scores and academic success. A parent’s educational level would be another. But we should also want to factor in the parent’s type of job/career. An artist/performer/lower level bureaucrat , etc. might have a college degree and might consider themselves middle class but still have a fairly modest income level (a single parent making around $35K would be eligible for a reduced priced lunch for her 2 kids) but their kids would most likely still do well on standardized tests. On the other hand, a skilled, manual worker (such as an electrician, carpenter, garage owner/mechanic) might not have a college degree but would have a solid middle class income but their kids might not do especially well on tests.
Socio-economic status takes into account not just income and educational attainment but also elusive attitudes towards education, child rearing methods, interest in books, stimulating trips to museums, theaters, concerts, etc.
We must also emphasize that the relationship between SES and educational attainment is very strong in all western (and probably most non-western) industrialized societies)..
“Socio-economic status takes into account not just income and educational attainment but also elusive attitudes towards education, child rearing methods, interest in books, stimulating trips to museums, theaters, concerts, etc.”
NO! No it doesn’t.
So, as a nation, if we really want to raise test scores we should be more concerned with closing the SES gap.
Some important steps toward that goal:
A living wage w/benefits
Provide universal health care
Reduce income inequality
Increase post HS educational opportunities
Bring back manufacturing jobs
Promote and support unions
Promote marriage, family, and delaying pregnancy
Instead of promoting marriage and family it would be more eqitable to pay women the same as men.
Why not both.
“So, as a nation, if we really want to raise test scores we should be more concerned with closing the SES gap.”
I know you are using this as a hypothetical Rager but if raising test scores is a valued goal, we, in this country, are in a world of ignorance, stupidity and downright insanity.
Not a hypothetical. Kind of a mix of irony and absurdity. That’s how far off the tracks we have plunged.
I object to any reference to an “achievement gap” because it not-so-subtly suggests that “some children” don’t have what it takes to keep up with “other children” without a lot of extra effort. It’s blatantly clear from research that the differences between exposure to enriched environments, beginning at birth, in poverty-level children and children from more economically stable homes, results in significantly less brain development. Further, this development is concentrated in the areas of the brain most used in “academic” subjects. Why do we need studies such as this to tell us what should be obvious? And perhaps a more significant question is why is there still a debate about what needs to happen to close the opportunity gap?
Your statement seems contradictory.
If children living in poverty suffer from incomplete brain development due to a lack of enriching stimuli, then aren’t they missing “what it takes” to keep up with the children from enriched environments with more completely developed brains? Doesn’t the post natal neglect result in a brain less capable for academic success?
Sorry for the confusion. What I mean is that the term “achievement gap” suggests that all children should be able to attain the same level of “academic” success. The expectation that children who have not had the same opportunities to develop the areas of the brain required to “keep up” with others is as inappropriate as expecting undernourished children to “keep up” in physical activities. The focus has been on closing this perceived gap through more academic work, rather than by working toward a level playing field when children enter school.
What I’m suggesting is that the “gap” can be closed by providing underprivileged children with enriched environments in birth-age 5 (and beyond) programs. In other words, address the problem at its source–how can we help these children enhance brain development in their earliest years.
The term “achievement gap” has its etymological roots in bovine excrement with related roots in equine excrement.
A single mom smoking crack while her baby son cries in an unchanged diaper in a dilapidated walk up.
A married mother, in her 3200 sq foot center hall colonial, reads Goodnight Moon to her infant daughter while her father is on-line planning their weekend trip to Hamptons.
Eight years later . . . Now lets wonder why the young boy can’t tests as well as the young girl.
Your argument would be more viable if you were to steer away from these stereotypes. The wealthy can have dysfunctional habits, too. That’s why there are such disparate consequences for the use of powdered cocaine vs crack. One group gets punished the other gets rehab.
Thanks Judith. Yes. Total agreement. I should have added universal Pre-K that is developmentally appropriate and enriching. And public school K-8 programs that eliminate testing altogether that focus on academic and cultural enrichment.
Amen–but I would add “that focus on the development of the whole child.”
And 8 years later the press and politicians blame the boys 3rd grade teacher because he can’t add two digit numbers and praise the girl’s 3rd grade teacher because the girl can read fluently at the 5th grade level. Ha! Our media and our politicians should be embarrassed.
Embarrassed and sued.
If I may interject…
From my experience, the term “achievement gap” is used almost exclusively (most especially by those pushing and mandating corporate education reform in the service of $tudent $ucce$$) as shorthand for “test score gap” (note its use in the posting).
As I see it, it becomes a substitute for, and diversion from, using terms related to genuine learning and teaching. By confounding and distorting discussion, it then becomes a substitute for clearly thinking through and evaluating various important issues.
From my POV, saying/writing “test score gap” helps make the false metrics of the rheephormistas look a lot less all encompassing, and important, and impressive.
Just sayin’…
😎
Christene
There is a vey good reason for such stereotypes. Political correctness does nothing here but ignore reality.
MUST READ! From Jersey Jazzman
http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-parcc-silly-season.html