whose ProblemIVs no cop~out to acknowledge the effects

of socioeconomic disparities on student learning.Rather, its a vital step to closing the achievement gap.

Richard Rothstein

I n my work, I've repeatedly stressed this logical claim: Ifyou send two groups of students to equally high-qualityschools, the group with greater socioeconomic disadvan-tage wiil necessarily have lower average achievementthan the more fortunate group.'

Why is this so? Because low-income children often have nohealth insurance and therefore no routine preventive medicaland dental care, leading to more school absences as a result ofillness. Children in low-income families are more prone toasthma, resulting in more sleeplessness, irritahility and lack ofexercise. They experience lower birth weight as well as morelead poisoning and iron-deficiency anemia, each of whichleads to diminished cognitive ability and more behavior prob-lems. Their families frequently fall behind in rent and move,so children switch schools more often, losing continuity ofinstruction.

Poor children are, in general, not read to aloud as often orexposed to complex language and large vocabularies. Theirparents have low-wage jobs and are more frequently laid off,causing family stress and more arbitrary discipline. Theneighborhoods through which these children walk to schooland in which they play have more crime and drugs and feweradult role models with professional careers. Such children aremore often in single-parent families and so get less adultattention. They have fewer cross-country trips, \'isits tomuseums and zoos, music or dance lessons, and organizedsports leagues to develop their ambition, cultural awareness,and self-confidence.

Each of these disadvantages makes only a small contributionto the achievement gap, but cumulatively they explain a lot.

I've also noted that no matter how serious their problems,all disadvantaged students can expect to have higher achieve-

8 E D U C A T I O N A L L E A D E R S H I P / A P K I I _ 2 0 0 8

ment in better schools than in worse ones. And even in l h.same schools, natural human variability ensures a distributionof achievement in every group. Some high-achieving dis-advantaged students always outperform typical middle classstudents, and some low-achieving middle class students fallbehind typical disadvantaged students. The achievement gapis a difference in the average achievement of students fromdisadvantaged and middle class families.

I've drawn a policy conclusion from these observations:Closing or substantially narrowing achievement gaps requirescombining school improvement with reforms that narrow thevast socioeconomic inequalities in the United States. Withoutsuch a combination, demands (tike those of No Child LeftBehind) that schools fully close achievement gaps not onlywill remain unfulfilled, but also will cause us to foolishly andunfairly condemn our schools and teachers.

Distorting DisadvantageMost educators understand how socioeconomic disadvantagelowers average achievement. However, some have resisted thislogic, throwing up a variety of defenses. Some find in myexplanations the implication that disadvantaged children havea genetic disability, that poor and minority children can'tlearn. They say that a perspective that highlights the socio-economic causes of low achievement "blames the victim" andlegitimizes racism. Some find my analysis dangerous becauseit "makes excuses" for poor instruction or because demandsfor social and economic reform "let schools off the hook" forraising student achievement. And others say it's too difficult toaddress nonschool problems like inadequate incomes, health,or housing, so we should only work on school reform. Theway some of these critics see it, those of us who cati aueniion

Is Poverty?

to such nonschool issues must want towait until Utopian economic change (or"socialism") becomes a reality before webegin to improve schools.

Some critics cite schools that enrolldisadvantaged students but still get highstandardized test scores as proof thatgreater socioeconomic equality is notessential for closing achievement gaps—because good schools have shown theycan do it on their own. And some criticsare so single-mindedly committed to aschools-only approach that they can'tbelieve anyone could seriously advocatepursuing both school and socioeconomicimprovement simultaneously.

Seeing Through "No Excuses"The commonplace "no excuses" ideologyimplies that educators—were they torealize that their efforts alone were insuf-ficient to raise student achievement—would be too simple-minded then tobring themselves to exert their full effori.The ideology presumes that policy-makers with an Olympian perspective

Closing achievement gaps requirescombining school improvement withreforms that narrow the vast socioeconomicinequalities in the United States.

can trick teachers into performing at ahigher level by making them believe thatun realistically high degrees of successare within reach.

There's a lack of moral, political, andintellectual integrity in this suppressionof awareness of how social andeconomic disadvantage lowers achieve-ment. Our first obligation should be toanalyze social problems accurately; onlythen can we design effective solutions.Presenting a deliberately flawed versionof reality, fearing that the truth will leadto excuses, is not only com.ipt but alsoself-defeating.

Mytholog}' cannot, in the long run,inspire better instruction. Teachers see for

themselves how poor health or familyeconomic stress impedes students'learning. Teachers may nowadays beintimidated from acknowledging theserealities aloud and may, in groupthinkobedience, repeat the mantra that "allchildren can learn." But nobody is fooled.Teachers still know that although all chil-dren can leam, some learn less wellbecause of poorer health or less-securehomes. Suppressing such truths leadsonly to teacher cynicism and disillusion.Talented teachers abandon the profession,vin.litng to shoulder responsibility for theirown instructional competence but not forfailures beyond their control.

Mythology also prevents educators

10 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP/APRIL 2008

from properly diagnosing educationallailure where it exists. If we expect alldisadvantaged students to succeed atlevels typical of affluent sludenis, theneven the best inner-city teachers seemlike failures. If we pretend that achieve-ment gaps are entirely within teachers'control, with claims to the contrary only"excuses," how can we distinguish betterfrom worse classroom practice?

Who's Getting Off the Hook?Promoters ot ihc myth that schools alonecan overcome social and economiccauses of low achievement assert thatclaims to the contrary let schools "off thehook." But their myth itself lets politicaland cor[3orate officials off a hook. Weabsolve these leaders from responsibilityfor narrowing the per\-asive inequalitiesol American society by asserting thatgood schools alone can overcome theseinequalities. Forget about health caregaps, racial segregation, inadequatehousing, or income insecurity If, aftersuccessful school reform, all adolescents

regardless of background could leavehigh school fully prepared to earnmiddle class incomes, there would,indeed, be little reason for concernabout contemporary inequality Oppor-tunities of children from all races andethnic groups, and of rich and poor,would equalize in the next generationsolely as a result of improved schooling.This absurd conclusion follows fromthe "no excuses" approach.

Some critics urge that educatorsshould noi acknowledge socioeconomicdisadvantage because their uniqueresponsibility is to improve classroompractices, which they can control.According [o such reasoning, we shouldleave to health, housing, and laborexpens the challenge of worrying aboutinequalities in their respective fields. Yetwe are all citizens in this democracy,and educators have a special and uniqueinsight into the damage that deprivationdoes to children's learning potential.

If educators who face this unfortu-nate state of affairs daily don't speak up

about it, who will? Educators and theirprofessional organizations should insistto every politician who will listen (andto those who will not) that social andeconomic reforms are needed to createan environment in which the mosteffective teaching can take place.

And yes, we should also call onhousing, health, and antipoverty advo-cates to take a broader view that inte-grates school improvement into theiradvocacy of greater economic andsocial equality. Instead, however, criticalvoices for reform have been silenced,told they should stick to their knitting,fearing an accusation that denouncinginequality is tantamount to "makingexcuses."

WhatWeCanDoIt's a canard that educators advocatingsocioeconomic reforms wish to postponeschool improvement until we havecreated an impractical economic Utopia.Another canard is the idea that it'simpractical to narrow socioeconomic

A S S O C I A T I O N T O R S U P E R V I S I O N A N D C U R R I C I M . U M D f i v r i o p M E N i 1 1

inequalities, so school reform is the onlyreasonable lever. Modest social andeconomic reforms, well within our polit-ical reach, could have a palpable effecton student achievement. For example,we could

• Ensure good pediatric and dental carelor all students, in school-based clinics.

• Expand existing low-incomehousing subsidy programs to reducefamilies' involuntary mobility.

cultural, artistic, organizational, andathletic potential.

None of this is Utopian. All is worthdoing in itself, vtath the added benefit ofsending children to school more readyto learn. Educators who are unafraid toadvocate such policies will finally callthe hand of those politicians and busi-ness leaders who claim that universalhealth care is too expensive but simulta-neously demand school reform so they

• Provide higher-quality early child-hood care so that low-income childrenare not parked before televisions whiletheir parents are working.

• Increase the earned income taxcredit, the minimum wage, and collec-tive bargaining rights so that families oflow-wage workers are less stressed.

• Promote mixed-income housingdevelopment in suburbs and in gentri-fying cities to give more low-incomestudents the benefits of integratededucations in neighborhood schools.

• Fund after-school programs so thatinner-city children spend fewernonschool hours in dangerous environ-ments and, instead, develop their

can posture as defenders of minoritychildren.

In some schools, disadvantagedstudents are effectively tracked by race,denied the most qualified teachers andthe best curriculum. Failure is bothexpected and accepted. Unfortunately,some educators do use socioeconomicdisadvantage as an excuse for failing toteach well under adverse conditions.But we exaggerate the frequency of thisexcuse. Some teachers excuse poorpractice, but others work terribly hardto develop disadvantaged students'talents. Where incompetence does exist,we should insist that school administra-tors root it out.

But consider this: The NationalAssessment of Educational Progress(NAEP), administered to a nationalstudent sample by the federal govern-ment, is generally considered the mostreliable measure of U.S. students'achievement. Since 1990, the achieve-ment gap between minority and whitestudents has barely changed, feedingaccusations that educators simply ignorethe needs of minority youth. Yet averagemath scores of black 4th graders in2007 were higher than those of white4th graders in 1990 (National Centerfor Education Statistics, 2007, p. 10). Ifwhite achievement had been stagnant,the gap would have fully closed. Therewere also big math gains for black 8thgraders (National Center for EducationStatistics, 2007. p. 26). The gap stag-nated only because white students alsogained.

In reading, scores have remained flat.Perhaps this is because math achieve-ment is a more direct result of schoolinstruction, whereas reading ability alsoreflects studeiits' home literacy environ-ment. Nonetheless, the dramatic gainsin math do not suggest that mostteachers of disadvantaged students aresitting around making excuses forfailing to teach. Quite the contrary.

Reticent About RaceIt is puzzling that some find racismimplied in explanations of why dis-advantaged students typically achieve atlower levels. But to understand thatchildren who've been up at night,wheezing from untreated asthma, willbe less attentive in school is not toblame those children for their lowerscores. It is to explain that we canenhance those students' capacity toleam with policies that reduce theepidemic incidence of asthma in low-income communities—by enforcingprohibitions on the use of high-sulfurheating oil, for example, or requiringurban buses to substitute natural gas fordiesel fuel—or provide pediatric care,

12 EDUCATIONAL LCADCSSHIP/APHII. 2008

including treatment for asthma symp-toms- Denying the impact of poorhealth on learning leads to blamingteachers for circumstances completelybeyond their control.

The fact that such conditions affectblacks more than whites reflects racismin the United States. Calling attention tosuch conditions is not racist. But ignoringthem, insisting that they have no effect ifteaching is competent, may be.

Some critics lump my analyses ofsocial and economic obstacles withothers' claims that "black culture"explains low achievement. Like otheroverly simplistic explanations ofacademic failure, cultural explanationscan easily be exaggerated. There is,indeed, an apparent black-white test-score gap, even when allegedly poorblack and white students are comparedwith one another or even when middleclass black and white students arecompared 'with one another. But thesedeceptively large gaps mostly stem fromloo-broad definitions of "poor" and"middle class." Typically, low-incomewhite students are compared withblacks who are much poorer, andmiddle class black students arecompared with whites who are muchmore affluent. If we restricted compar-isons to socioeconomically similarstudents, the residual test-score gapwould mostly disappear (see Phillips,Crouse, & Ralph, 1998).

But probably not all of it. Responsiblereformers are seeking to help low-income black parents improve child-rearing practices. Others attempt toreduce the influence of gang role modelson black adolescents or lo raise thestatus of academic success in blackcommunities. Generally, these reformersare black; white experts avoid suchdiscussions, tearing accusations of racism.

This is too bad. If we're afraid todiscuss openly the small contributionthat cultural factors make to achieve-ment gaps, we suggest, falsely, that we'rehiding something much bigger.

Dancing Around the Issue1 am oiten asked to respond to claimsthat some schools with disadvantagedstudents have higher achievement,allegedly proving ihat schools alone canclose achievement gaps. Certainly, someschools are superior and should beimitated. But no schools serving dis-advantaged students have demonstratedconsistent and sustained improvementthat closes—not Just narrows—achieve-ment gaps. Claims to the contrary are

equal opportunity for all students in theUnited States.

Beyond Either/OrNobody should be lorced to choosebetween advocating for better schools orspeaking out for greater social andeconomic equality Both are essential,Each depends on the other. Educatorscannot be effective if they make excusesfor poor student performance. But theywill have little chance for success unless

Denying the impact of poor health on learningleads to blaming teachers for circumstancescompletely heyond their control.often fraudulent, sometimes based onlow-income schools whose parents areunusually well educated; whose admis-sions policies accept only the mosttalented disadvantaged students; orwhose students, although eligible forsubsidized lunches, come from stableworking-class and not poor communi-ties.

Some claims are based on schoolsthat concentrate on passing standard-ized basic skills tests to the exclusion ofteaching critical thinking, reasoning, thearts, social studies, or science, or ofteaching the "whole child," as middleclass schools are more wont to do.Increasingly, such claims are based onhigh proportions of students scoringabove state proficiency standards,defined at a low level. Certainly, if wedefine proficiency down, we can moreeasily reduce achievement gaps withoutaddressing social or economic inequality.But responsible analysts have alwaysdefined closing the achievement gap asachieving sitnilar score distributions andaverage scale scores among subgroups.Even No Child Left Behind proclaims agoal of proficiency at "challenging"levels for each subgroup. Onlyachieving such goals will lead to more

they also join with advocates of socialand economic refonn to improve theconditions from which cbildren come toschool. S!

' For further discussion of this issue, seeray book Class and Schools: Using Social.Economic, and Educational Reform to Close theBlack-White Achievement Gap (EconomicPolicy Institute, 2004") and "The Achieve-meni Gap: A Broader Picture" (Educationalleadership, November 2004).

ReferencesNational Center for Education Statistics.

(2007). The nation's report card: Mathe-matics 2007. Washingion, DC: Author.Available: htip://nces,ed.gov/naiionsreponcard/pdi7main200 7/200 7494. pdf

Phillips, M., Crouse J . , &r Ralph. J. (1998).Does ihe black-white tesi score gap widenafter children emer school? In C. Jencks& M. Phillips (Eds,), The black-whUe testscore gap (pp. 229-272). Washington,DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Author's note: For documentation of thespecific criiiques reiercntcd in this article,readers can contact me at riroth@epi.org.

Copyright © 2008 Richard Rothstein.

Richard Rothstein is Research Asso-ciate at the Economic Policy Institute;riroth@epi.org.

A S S O C I A T I O N FOR S U P E R V I S I O N A N H C U R R I C U L U M D E V E L O P M E N T 13