Black-White Differences in Achievement:
The Importance of Wealth
Amy J. Orr
Linfield College
In this article, the author argues that wealth, which is an indicator of both financial and human
capital, can affect academic achievement,
as well
as help totoexplain the gap in black-white test
Delivered
by Ingenta
User
Unknown
scores. Analyses reveal that wealth
affects
achievement through its effect on the amount of
IP: 12.217.228.119
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
cultural capital to which a child is exposed. Because blacks have substantially less wealth than
do whites, wealth can help to explain a portion of the racial achievement gap. The implications of the findings are discussed.
S
tudies have generally found that black
students have fewer educational opportunities than do white students and are
at a disadvantage compared to whites on
several educational outcomes. Of particular
importance is academic achievement, often
measured by performance on standardized
test scores. Black adolescents consistently
have lower scores on standardized tests than
do white adolescents. Although research has
shown that the gap in black-white test scores
has narrowed over the past 30 years, it is still
substantial, and at the current rate of change,
it may take approximately 50 years to close
the gap (Hedges and Nowell 1998). Because
of the importance of test scores in determining college attendance and selectivity, wages,
and job placement (Kane 1998), the factors
that lead to inequalities in test scores must be
uncovered so that they may be alleviated.
For many years, researchers have been
searching for explanations as to why blacks,
on average, have lower achievement than do
whites. One major finding has been that
much of the differences can be attributed to
black-white differences in family background
characteristics, such as socioeconomic status
(SES) and family size or composition. Wealth,
defined as the value of all assets of a particular family or individual minus any debts owed,
has not received sufficient attention. Blacks
have less wealth than do whites, regardless of
income, education, and occupation (Blau and
Graham 1990; Eller 1994; Merida 1995;
Oliver and Shapiro 1989, 1995). For example,
Merida (1995) found that middle-class blacks
have only 15 percent of the wealth held by
middle-class whites (when class is measured
with the traditional three factors).
While researchers have paid extensive
attention to SES as a determinant of achievement, wealth is often not included in conceptualizations of this factor. Rather, income,
educational attainment, and occupational
prestige have been viewed as sufficient indicators of economic well-being and social status. It has only been recently that wealth has
been viewed as an important component of
SES and as sufficiently different from income
to demand our attention when discussing
important educational outcomes.
The most recent research conducted in this
area was by Conley (1999, 2001) and Phillips,
Brooks-Gunn et al. (1998). Conley found significant effects of wealth on several academic
outcomes, including educational attainment
(high school graduation and college completion), the probability of dropping out, the risk
of expulsion, and the risk of being held back
a grade. Conley did not consider academic
achievement, although he alluded to its possible connection to wealth in 2001, when he
posed the question: “Can an effect of wealth
be detected in students’ aspirations, educa-
Sociology of Education 2003, Vol. 76 (October): 281–304
281
282
Orr
tional expectations, and even performance?” used to create educational opportunities. For
(p. 70). Phillips, Brooks-Gunn et al. (1998) example, assets, in the form of savings
began to answer this question by including accounts, certificates of deposit (CDs), indiwealth in models of academic achievement vidual retirement accounts (IRAs), stocks, and
among children aged five to six. Their failure bonds, produce a flow of income through
to find an effect of wealth may have been the interest and dividends. Having investments in
result of the young age of their sample. the form of businesses, farms, or real estate
Perhaps wealth does have an effect on can also produce a profit that can be used to
achievement, but at a later age. I explore this expand educational opportunities.
possibility via analyses of theDelivered
academicby Ingenta
Other to
types of assets can either help to
achievement of an older sample of
children.
I minimize expenses coming out of a family’s
User
Unknown
argue that wealth is not only a determinant
of earned income or can serve as a stockpile of
IP: 12.217.228.119
achievement, in general, but can
help
to resources that are available when needed
Date:
2004..12..08..18..05..
explain the gap in black-white test scores.
(Oliver and Shapiro 1995). For example,
although few may view home ownership or
the ownership of a car as a way to expand
educational opportunities, owning these
THEORY
types of assets can provide financial advanThe importance of wealth may be best under- tages that nonownership does not. Home
stood by using broad notions of capital, such owners are provided with tax deductions,
as those used by Bourdieu (1986). According exclusions, and deferrals. While home owners
to Bourdieu, the forms of capital are convert- may pay mortgages, part of this expense
ible, although they differ in their liquidity, or taken from earned income is returned to
the ease by which they can be converted. them through special tax breaks that are not
Some, like economic capital, are more liquid available to renters. The money that is
than others and can be more easily converted returned to home owners, or not paid to the
to a different form (in this case, social or cul- government, can be used to expand educatural capital). As a form of economic capital, tional opportunities. Once a mortgage is paid
then, wealth can be used as both a direct off, the money once used to pay it can be
financial resource and can be converted into diverted into academic resources. Renters
other types of capital, either cultural or social. continue to pay this monthly expense, which
Wealth, as economic capital, can help parents takes away finances that could be used to pay
to purchase many important educational for the education of their children.
In addition to its direct impact on a famiresources, such as books, computers, private
schooling, and various status symbols. Wealth ly’s economic well-being by producing
can also be cashed in or converted to give the income and/or minimizing expenses that
next generation some degree of cultural, as come out of a family’s earned income, wealth
well as social, capital (for example, by allow- can benefit a family by providing a sense of
ing parents to spend more time with their economic security (Oliver & Shapiro 1995).
children). The presence of various forms of Parents may be more willing to spend earned
capital can contribute positively to a child’s income on items that they do not deem to be
necessities if they have financial resources
achievement.
that they can fall back on in times of need.
Many educational resources can be viewed as
Wealth as Economic (Financial)
“wants,” rather than “needs.” Families who
Capital
feel financially secure, because of wealth, may
Wealth can contribute to the financial capital be more likely to invest in these items.
Although wealth can affect academic
available to a family. Assets can produce
income and/or can minimize expenses that achievement in many of the same ways that
may normally come out of a family’s earned income does, it may actually intensify these
income. Certain types of assets can translate effects. Two families with similar incomes but
directly into added income, which can be different amounts of wealth may be unable to
Black-White Differences in Achievement
283
provide the same opportunities for their chil- has consequences for the quality of public
dren. While middle-income families provide schools. Wealth is associated with higher
more opportunities for their children than do property taxes, which fund local school dislow-income families, middle-income families tricts. A larger tax base generally translates
with a greater amount of wealth can provide into a higher per-pupil expenditure. Children
more opportunities for their children than can who attend wealthier public schools can
middle-income families with a lesser amount of expect a lower student-to-teacher ratio; highwealth. Children from families with little wealth er-quality teachers; better facilities; and the
may have a decreased chance of attending col- presence of educational resources, such as
Delivered
Ingenta toand up-to-date books (see, e.g.,
lege, less access to high-quality schools,
fewerby computers
User Unknown
educational resources in their homes,
fewer Education Week 1998).
IP: 12.217.228.119
opportunities to accumulate cultural
capital,
and limited access to items that may
Date:
increase
2004..12..08..18..05..
Educational Resources Wealth can detersocial status.
mine the amount of educational resources
available to a child in the home. Greater
College Expectations Wealth can affect the wealth can lead to greater educational
academic achievement of a child through its resources; for example, families who have
effects on the child’s motivation, aspirations, wealth may be better able to provide books,
and expectations. For example, home owners computers, or tutors for their children. With
have an advantage over non-home owners in such academic materials at home, children’s
that they have the ability to take out a second learning time can be increased. For instance,
mortgage and have increased creditworthi- children can spend time outside school readness. A second mortgage can directly trans- ing or working on a computer, thereby gainlate into extra finances for educational expen- ing knowledge that they may not have
ditures. Increased creditworthiness can learned in school (Downey 1995; Jones 1984;
improve the likelihood of being approved for Milne et al. 1986).
an educational loan. Parents may be more
likely to encourage a child to plan for college Cultural Capital Wealth, as economic capiif they are certain that the finances will be tal, can be cashed in to obtain cultural capital
available either from a second mortgage or (Bourdieu 1986), defined as “instruments for
an educational loan, if not from income. the appropriation of symbolic wealth socially
Parents’ encouragement to attend college designated as worthy of being sought and
can affect a child’s motivations and aspira- possessed” (Bourdieu 1977:488). DiMaggio
tions. Previous research has shown that both (1982) showed that cultural capital, meamotivations and aspirations affect effort, sured by attendance at symphony concerts
which, in turn, affects academic achievement and arts performances or exhibitions and a
(Natriello and McDill 1986).1
cultivated self-image, has a positive effect on
academic achievement. Whether a child has
Quality of Schooling The lack of additional access to these types of opportunities can
financial resources may limit the ability to depend on the amount of wealth available to
send children to private schools. Research has a family; children from families with little
shown that attendance at a private school wealth may have less access to cultural capican have a positive effect on a child’s achieve- tal.
ment (Bryk, Lee, and Holland 1993; Hoffer
1997–98). The cost of private schooling has Social Acceptance and Self-esteem Several
been estimated to be over $4,000 per year, scholars have recognized the importance of
which can be more than a quarter of the wealth in contributing to the degree of an
income of a moderate-income family individual’s social acceptance. For example,
(Coleman, Schiller, and Schneider 1993; Warner (1949/1994:195) noted that wealth
Tracy 2001). Having additional income from could be put to use to acquire “symbols that
assets can help to absorb this cost.
can ultimately be translated into social accepAs Conley (1999) pointed out, wealth also tance by those who have sufficient money to
284
Orr
Particularly for adolescents, the social status
aspire to higher levels than they presently
conferred by having the best house in the
enjoy.” These symbols may include “the
neighborhood may instill confidence that
‘right’ house, the ‘right’ neighborhood,’
could translate to success in an academic set[and] the ‘right’ furniture” (Warner
ting. Conversely, living in conditions that are
1949/1994:195). Weber (1946:188) also disinferior to those of one’s peers may cause anxcussed the connection between wealth and
iety and a lack of confidence in one’s family
social acceptance, stating that “only the resiand oneself. Since underlying conceptions of
dent of a certain street (‘the street’) is considpoverty often rely on a notion of relativity,
housing quality may be the most visible way
ered as belonging to ‘society’, is qualified for
Delivered
to poverty (or affluence) manifests
that relative
social intercourse, and is visited and
invited.”by Ingenta
User
Unknown
itself
in
the lives of adolescents and with
Although these authors’ comments were
respect to their primary group affiliations. (p.
IP:
12.217.228.119
directed to the social acceptance of adults,
65)
Date:
there is reason to believe that wealth
can2004..12..08..18..05..
also
contribute to the social acceptance of children.
Human Capital and Wealth
Previous research has shown that an “adolescent society” exists within schools Human capital theory stresses the importance
(Coleman 1961; Eitzen 1975; Goldberg and of human characteristics as resources that are
Chandler 1989; Schultz 1990) and that with- available to expand an individual’s opportuniin this society, there is a status system based ties. Certain individuals have advantages over
on various criteria. Children place a fairly high others because they have attributes that are
value on participation in athletics and other valuable in attaining particular goals. Human
extracurricular activities and personal popu- capital theory could help to explain the effect
larity. Popularity is often based on the types of wealth on academic achievement, as well
of material possessions one has and the as on the gap in black-white test scores. The
clothes that one wears (Schultz 1990). For characteristics of parents with wealth may differ in important ways from those of parents
example, Ferguson (1999) reported that in a
with little or no wealth.
particular community, 82 percent of the
One way in which wealthy parents may
young black men, 65 percent of the young
differ from less-wealthy parents is that they
white men, 81 percent of the young black
may be more oriented toward and concerned
women, and 80 percent of the young white
about the future. This concern may lead them
women stated that having “cool clothes”
to start planning for and investing assets for
makes a student popular. The ability to have
the future early because they know that their
these types of “status symbols” can be affectpresent behavior may greatly affect their
ed by wealth. If children or their families do future status. However, financial security may
not have discretionary income at their dispos- not be the only goal of “future-oriented” indial, children may be unable to keep up with viduals. It is likely that an orientation toward
the latest fashions or trends, which can be the future affects other areas of their lives as
costly. Having these items may increase their well, such as a concern about the education
popularity or social status, which has been of their children.
shown to have a positive effect on children’s
Parents with a strong sense of the impact
self-esteem (Walker and Greene 1986). of their present behavior on future outcomes
Research has shown that positive self-esteem may be more likely to invest in their children’s
can lead to higher academic achievement education than may those who do not have
(Liu, Kaplan, and Risser 1992; Sterbin and this sense or have lost hope in the
Rakow 1996).
present–future connection.2 Knowing how
Wealth may also affect self-esteem in important education is to several later outanother way. As Conley (1999:65) pointed comes, future-oriented parents may be more
out, housing (an integral part of wealth) likely to make monetary investments in edu“serves as an outward sign of social status.” cation, as well as in relationships and experiAs he explained:
ences that may help their children to achieve
Black-White Differences in Achievement
285
better. For example, parents with this of the arts, music, and literature, such as takattribute may be more likely to be concerned ing them to museums or art performances.
about the quality of their children’s school or
“Status-seeking” parents may not only
the educational resources available to the provide their child with knowledge of or
children at home. They may also be more experience with the arts, music, and literalikely to spend time participating in educa- ture, but may reproduce this characteristic in
tional activities that can benefit their children their children, instilling in them an interest in
academically, such as reading books to them, these areas. By increasing the cultural capital
helping them with their homework, or get- available to and possessed by their children,
Delivered
Ingenta
to may be benefiting their chilting involved at the school. This
type ofby these
parents
User Unknown
parental support, commonly referred
to as dren academically. As I discussed earlier,
IP:positively
12.217.228.119
social capital (Coleman 1988), can
teachers tend to have higher expectations of
affect children’s achievement.
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
children who have cultural capital. These
The link between having parents who are higher expectations can have a positive affect
oriented toward the future and high academ- on a child’s achievement. In light of these
ic achievement may not be due solely to the arguments, I posit the following hypothesis:
parents’ actions. Such parents can serve as
Hypothesis 1: After parental education, occurole models for their children, possibly
pation, and income are controlled, parental
increasing the children’s chances of becomwealth will have a positive effect on a child’s
ing future oriented. An orientation toward
achievement.
the future could lead to increased motivation
to do well in school, improving the likelihood
of academic success.
Wealth and Racial Differences in
Parents with wealth may also differ from
those with little or no wealth in their concern Achievement
for social status. Owning a home or other Since blacks have less wealth than do whites,
types of assets is a way to improve one’s pres- they may be at an educational disadvantage
tige. Those who invest in assets may be more even if their incomes are equal to those of
concerned about their social standing, inde- their white counterparts. Coming from famipendent of their concern with financial welllies with lower levels of wealth, black children
being. Veblen (1934:34) discussed the conmay have less access to financial, human, culcern for status as a motivation for the accutural, and social capital. With lower levels of
mulation of wealth when he stated, “Among
financial capital, they may have less access to
the motives which lead men to accumulate
high-quality schools, to educational resources
wealth, the primacy, both in scope and intenin their homes, to items and experiences that
sity, therefore, continues to belong to this
could increase their cultural capital, to colmotive of pecuniary emulation.” He argued
lege, and to status symbols. In addition, they
that individuals who accumulate assets are
may have lower motivation, aspirations, and
likely to be concerned about the views of othself-esteem. Limited access to the human capers and to use the ownership of assets as a
way to “gain the esteem and envy of [their] ital that is available in wealthy families can
lead to lower levels of cultural and social capfellowmen” (p. 32).
There are several ways in which an individ- ital and hence to lower achievement.
ual can improve his or her social status. Therefore, because black and white families
Investing in assets is one, and having cultural differ substantially in the amount of wealth
capital is another. Individuals who seek status they possess, wealth may help explain blackmay be motivated to increase their cultural white differentials in achievement.
capital, as well as to invest in the cultural capHypothesis 1, Corollary 1: After controlling for
ital of their children (see, e.g., Bourdieu
parental education, occupation, and income,
1986). These parents may be especially likely
increases in the gap in wealth between blacks
to provide their children with experiences
and whites will lead to increases in the gap
that will increase their children’s knowledge
between blacks’ and whites’ achievement.
286
Orr
Impact of Wealth on Older
Children’s Achievement
children progress through school. For example, Phillips, Crouse, and Ralph (1998) found
that from Grade 1 to Grade 12, the gap in
Wealth may affect the achievement of older mathematics scores widened by 0.18 stanchildren differently from that of younger chil- dard deviations. Although the gap in reading
dren for several reasons. First, older children scores remained fairly constant, the gap in
are more aware of costs and constraints. vocabulary scores widened by approximately
Aspirations and plans to attend college may 0.23 standard deviations.3 These findings
ebb as children begin to realize the costs of imply that a black student who enters school
Delivered
Ingenta
attending college and their parents’
capacityby with
the to
same test scores as a comparable
User Unknown
to pay for it.
white student will be likely to have lower test
Second, wealth may have IP:
a stronger
12.217.228.119
scores than the white student at the time he
impact on adolescents than Date:
it does2004..12..08..18..05..
on or she leaves the 12th grade.
younger children because adolescents identiThe arguments presented in the previous
fy more strongly with their peers and less with section help to explain why the achievement
their parents (Steinberg and Silverberg 1986). gap between black and white students may
During early adolescence, children have high widen during the later years of schooling.
levels of conformity with their peers (Berndt Because of their lower levels of wealth, black
1979; Costanzo 1970) and are sensitive about parents may be less likely to finance their chilhow they are viewed by others (Elkind 1967; dren’s college education directly or absorb
Okun and Sasfy 1977). Therefore, fitting in the cost of college loans. This argument was
with peers can play an important role in how supported by Hauser and Anderson (1991),
adolescents feel about themselves. Popularity who argued that a shift from grants to college
at this point in their lives can often be based loans in the 1980s may have been responsible
on the type of car that they drive and the for the decline in the number of black seniors
clothes that they wear (Ferguson 1999; who aspired to attend college. If black adoSchultz 1990), both of which can be affected lescents are aware that their parents cannot
by wealth. As with younger children, if ado- contribute financially to their education, they
lescents or their families do not have discre- may have low expectations and may theretionary income at their disposal, they may fore not be motivated to do well. In addition,
have less access to items that can increase the inability to keep up with other students in
their popularity. Since they place more the way of cars and clothes, as well as living
emphasis on conforming to their peers than in “inferior” housing, can have a negative
do younger children, they may be more effect on the self-esteem or self-confidence of
affected by wealth. Without wealth, having a older black children and, in turn, could lead
“nice” car (or any car, for that matter) may to lower academic achievement (Liu et al.
not be feasible. If discretionary income is not 1992; Sterbin and Rakow 1996) and conavailable, adolescents may also be unable to tribute to the widening achievement gap
afford the latest fashions. Having these items between black and white students as they
may increase their popularity or social status, grow older.
which has been shown to have a positive
Hypothesis 2, Corollary 1: The effect of wealth
effect on adolescents’ self-esteem (Walker and
on racial differences in achievement will
Greene 1986).
increase as children grow older.
Hypothesis 2: The effect of wealth on achievement will increase as a child grows older.
Widening of the Achievement Gap
in Later Grades
Research has shown that the gap in test
scores between blacks and whites widens as
The Importance of Types of Assets
Not all assets may contribute equally to a
child’s academic achievement. While wealth,
in general, is easily convertible, some assets
are more readily converted into ready cash
than are others. It is these assets that may be
Black-White Differences in Achievement
287
the most useful in contributing to educational opportunities while a child is attending
school. Assets that produce income, such as
CDs, stocks, bonds, and savings accounts,
can be used for a family’s immediate wellbeing, whereas assets like homes and vehicles
are less likely to be converted into cash unless
it is absolutely necessary to do so (see Oliver
and Shapiro 1995).4
from school surveys, transcripts of interviews,
and interviewers’ observations of the children’s home environments.
This data set was chosen for the analyses
because of the appropriateness of the measures it contains. While educational data sets,
such as the National Educational Longitudinal
Survey of 1988 and High School and Beyond,
contain a wide range of information about a
Delivered by child’s
Ingenta
to
education,
they typically do not conHypothesis 3: Wealth in the form of incomeUser Unknown
tain measures of family wealth. Data sets that
producing assets will have a greater effect on
IP: 12.217.228.119
achievement than will wealth in the form of do contain data on wealth, such as the Panel
Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) and the
non-income-producing assets. Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
Survey of Income and Program Participation,
Blacks are less likely to invest in income- have historically not collected adequate eduproducing assets than are whites (Oliver and cational data. 5 The NLSY79 Mothers and
Shapiro 1995). Hence, black families may Children data set contains data not only on
have fewer assets that can be converted easi- wealth, but on education.6
ly into cash for educational expenditures.
The sample contained school-aged chilTherefore, black-white differences in academ- dren (aged 5–14) who were given the
ic achievement may be a result not only of Mathematics portion of the Peabody
the overall value of assets, but of the types of Individual Achievement Test (PIAT) in 1996.
assets owned.
The children selected were black and white
(Caucasian); Hispanics and Asians, as well as
Hypothesis 3, Corollary 1: The greater the
black-white differences in the amount of other ethnic groups, were excluded from the
wealth held in income-producing assets, the sample. Children for whom there were missgreater the black-white differences in achieve- ing data on one or more of the variables of
interest were also excluded. See the appendix
ment.
for weighted descriptive statistics for the limited sample (the sample produced after listwise deletion of missing data) and the full
sample (prior to listwise deletion); the two
METHOD
samples did not differ significantly.
Data and Sample
The data used in the analyses came from a
subset of the data set of the National
Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY79) entitled “NLSY79 Mothers and Children.” This
subset includes approximately 3,000 women
who were aged 14–21 in 1979 and had
become mothers since that time. These
women were interviewed annually from 1979
through 2002. In addition to information
about the women, the data set contains information about their spouses and children. The
data on the children, which have been collected biannually since 1986, were derived
from interviews with the mothers; interviews
with the children; and various socioemotional, cognitive, and physiological assessments.
These data also contain information obtained
Variables
Dependent Variable The dependent variable
in the analyses was academic achievement,
measured by standardized scores on the
Mathematics subscale of the PIAT in 1996.7 The
PIAT, which consists of three components
(Mathematics, Reading Comprehension, and
Reading Recognition), is a widely used brief
assessment of achievement and ability (Baker et
al. 1993) that has been administered to a large
number of children over a wide range of ages.
Since the PIAT allows for comparability across
ages, it is attractive as a measure of academic
achievement.
As with the other components of the PIAT,
the Mathematics Assessment has been used
extensively as a measure of a child’s achieve-
288
Orr
ment (see, e.g., Baharudin and Luster 1998; these commodities. The second variable was
Hao 1995; Kaestner 1997; Luster and created by taking the value of non-incomeMcAdoo 1994; Rodgers, Rowe, and May producing assets (the home and the vehicle)
1994). The Mathematics subscale is consid- and subtracting any debt owed on these posered to be a highly reliable and valid assess- sessions. Again, the two wealth variables
ment, having a test-retest reliability that reflect a five-year average (1990–94).
ranges from 0.73 for 5th graders to 0.84 for
SES was measured by three variables: fam12th graders with an across-grade median of ily income (a continuous variable ranging
0.74 (see Baker et al. 1993; Dunn and from $0 to $100,000 or more), parental eduDelivered
Ingentaand
to parental occupation. The final
Markwardt 1970). The assessment
has a highby cation,
Unknown
cross-year reliability and a highUser
concurrent
income variable used in the analyses was
IP: 12.217.228.119
correlation with the full PIAT composite
score average family income over a five-year period
(Baker et al. 1993).
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
(1990–94). Parental education (a continuous
The PIAT Mathematics Assessment “mea- variable ranging from 0 to 20, with 0 being
sures a child’s attainment in mathematics as “no education” and 20 being “8 years of coltaught in mainstream education” (Baker et al. lege or more”) was derived by taking the
1993). The assessment consists of 84 increas- average of the mother’s education and the
ingly difficult multiple-choice items. Skills mother’s spouse’s education. Parental occumeasured range from recognizing numerals pation, the average of the mother’s score on
to measuring concepts of advanced geome- the Duncan Index and the mother’s spouse’s
try and trigonometry.
score, ranged from 1 to 97. In the analyses,
the family occupation variable reflects an
Independent Variables The primary inde- average of Duncan scores from 1990 to 1994.
pendent variables in the analyses were wealth Race was coded 1 if the child was black and 0
(or net worth), SES, and race. Wealth vari- if the child was white.
ables were created by adding the value of all
household assets and subtracting household Mediating Variables The mediating varidebt. Assets included (1) the market value of ables in the analyses were cultural capital,
residential property; (2) the total amount of educational resources in the home, social
money assets, such as stocks, bonds, CDS, capital, child self-esteem, and school qualiIRAs, Keogh accounts, tax-deferred plans, and ty.10 Cultural capital was measured by a comsavings accounts; (3) the market value of posite variable comprised of 2–5 individual
vehicles; (4) the market value of farm, busi- variables, depending on the age of the
ness, and other property; (5) the market value child.11 For every child, the individual variof estates, trusts, and inheritances; and (6) ables were recoded to dichotomous variables
the value of other assets over $500. Debts and then averaged. For children aged 5, the
included (1) the amount of mortgages and variables averaged were “the child has gone
back taxes owed on residential property; (2) on an outing with parents at least once a
the amount of other debt on property; (3) the month” and “the child has been taken to a
amount of debt on farm, business, and other museum at least once or twice in the past
property; (4) the amount of money owed on year.” For children aged 6–9, the variables
vehicles; and (5) the total amount of other averaged were “there is a musical instrument
debts over $500. The wealth variables were that the child can use at home,” “the child
created for five years (1990–94).8 The final gets special lessons or activities,” “the child
wealth variable used in the analyses was the has been taken to a museum at least once or
average of the family’s net worth over this twice during the past year,” and “the child
period.9
has been taken to a performance during the
Wealth was divided into two variables to past year.” Finally, for children aged 10 or
test Hypothesis 3. The first variable measured older, the variables averaged were “the child
the net worth of income-producing assets. It has been taken to a museum at least once or
was created by taking the value of all income- twice during the past year,” “the child has
producing assets minus any debts owed on gone on an outing with the parent(s) in the
Black-White Differences in Achievement
289
past month,” “the child receives special vidual items. The greater the child’s score, the
lessons or activities,” “the child has been greater the child’s general self-worth is said to
taken to the theater at least once or twice be. The original score received on this assessduring the past year,” and “there is a musical ment was recoded to a range of 0 to 1, so
instrument that the child can use at home.” that all cases, regardless of age, had the same
In all cases, the range of this variable is 0 to 1. range on the general self-esteem variable.
Educational resources were also measured
Quality of education was measured by
by a composite variable. This variable was school sector and school location. School secconstructed in the same manner as cultural tor was coded 1 if the school was public and
Delivered
to
capital. For children aged 5, the
variablesby 0Ingenta
if the school
was private. School location
User Unknown
averaged for the educational-resources
com- was coded 1 if the school was in an urban
12.217.228.119
posite were “the child has 10 or IP:
more
books area and 0 otherwise.12
at home,” “the family receives two
Date:
or 2004..12..08..18..05..
more
magazines regularly,” and “the child has a Control Variables. Other important variables
record or tape player.” For children aged 6–9, that were included in the analyses were the
the variables averaged were “the child has 10 child’s age, mother’s age, mother’s score on
or more books at home” and “the family the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT),
receives a daily newspaper.” Finally, for chil- the child’s gender, number of the child’s sibdren aged 10 or older, the variables averaged lings, and the marital status of the parents.
were “the child has 10 or more books at The child’s age and mother’s age were conhome,” “the family receives a daily newspa- tinuous variables measured in years. Gender
per,” and “the child has a computer at was coded 1 if the child was female and 0 if
home.” In all cases, the range of this variable the child was male. The number of siblings
was 0 to 1.
ranged from 0 to 9. Marital status was coded
The measurement of social capital differed 1 if the mother was married and 0 otherwise.
according to the children’s ages. For a child In the analysis, the variable reflects the numaged 5–9, social capital was measured by ber of years the mother had been married
how often the mother read to the child, over a five-year period (1990–94).
coded 1 if the mother read to the child at
least three times a week and 0 if less often. Procedures
For a child aged 10 or older, social capital was
measured by whether or not the parent or Ordinary least-squares (OLS) regression was
parents had helped the child with homework used to test the hypotheses. Since the cases
were not independent (in many cases, there
in the past week, coded 1 if yes and 0 if no.
For children younger than age 8, self- were multiple children per household), the
esteem was measured by maternal responses tests were based on a heteroscedasticity-conto statements that dealt with whether or not sistent covariance matrix. Specifically, HCO
the child felt worthless or inferior and was used (see White, 1980). Several models
whether or not the child was liked by other were estimated; each model is explained in
children—coded 1 if the child did not feel detail in the following section. When I comworthless or inferior and 1 if the child was pared the models, I considered changes in
liked by other children, 0 otherwise. These the sizes of the regression coefficients and
scores were averaged to create a self-esteem examined the statistical significance of the
score that ranged from 0 to 1. If a child was coefficients.
It is important to note that the natural log
aged 8 or older, the self-esteem score was the
child’s raw score for self-worth on the Self- of income and the natural log of wealth were
Perception Profile for Children, which mea- used when the variables were included in the
sures a child’s sense of general self-worth and analyses. It is widely believed that the relaself-competence. For this study, the child’s tionship between wealth and achievement
score on the general self-worth subscale was outcomes, as well as that between income
used. This subscale includes six items, scored and achievement, is nonlinear (Conley 1999;
1 to 4; the raw score is the sum of the indi- Henretta and Campbell 1978; Mayer 1997).
290
Orr
For example, when considering the purchase
Descriptive statistics are also presented for
of educational resources, a $1,000 increase in blacks and whites separately. The two groups
wealth may mean more to a family who has a differed in several areas. The black children
net worth of only $3,000 than to a family scored an average of 8.09 points lower on the
who has a net worth of $100,000. For the PIAT Mathematics Assessment than did the
family with a lower net worth, an extra white children (a standard deviation gap of
$1,000 is likely to have more of an impact on 0.62). Over a 5-year period, the black mothwhether money is put toward the education ers were married for approximately 2 years,
of a child than it would for a family with a while the white mothers were married for
Delivered
Ingenta to 4 years. The black mothers
high net worth. Therefore, once
a certainby approximately
User
Unknown
level of wealth is reached, the effect
of wealth
were only slightly younger than the white
on achievement is likely to plateau.
IP:1312.217.228.119
mothers. The black children had fewer educaSince some individuals had Date:
a negative
2004..12..08..18..05..
tional resources in their homes and lower levvalue on the net worth variable, it was neces- els of cultural capital. The white children were
sary to make adjustments to these numbers less likely than the black children to live in
so that the natural log of wealth could be cal- urban areas and to attend public schools. The
culated. All net worth values that were less black children and white children were close
than or equal to 0 were recoded 1, so that the to equal in age, number of siblings, levels of
natural log could be ascertained. This proce- self-esteem, and levels of social capital. The
dure is similar to that used by Henretta and white parents tended to be employed in
Campbell (1978). Approximately 11 percent more prestigious occupations and, on averof the sample was affected. 14
age, to have completed more years of education. The black mothers scored an average of
530 points on the AFQT, while the white
mothers score an average of 758 points (a difRESULTS AND DISCUSSION
ference of 1.17 standard deviations). Over a
5-year period, the black mothers and white
Descriptive Analyses
mothers spent approximately the same
Table 1 presents the weighted descriptive sta- amount of time out of the workforce. As
tistics for the sample. The sample was 15 per- expected, the black families and white famicent black and 48 percent female. The aver- lies differed widely in the amount of wealth
age score on the PIAT Mathematics they had and in the amount of family income
Assessment was 104.29. The average child earned over a 5-year period. The black famihad two to three siblings, and, on average, lies had only 19 percent of the wealth held by
the mothers had been married 3.81 out of the the white families and only 56 percent of the
previous 5 years. The average age of the chil- income (see Table 2).
dren was 10–11 years; the average age of the
mother was 35. In addition, 74 percent of the
children lived in urban areas, and 87 percent Wealth, Achievement, and the
attended public schools. The average child Racial Test Score Gap
came from a home with relatively few educational resources and little social capital, but The results of the regression of achievement
had fairly high self-esteem and access to a fair on race, SES, and wealth are presented in
degree of cultural capital. The average family Table 3. Model 1 contains only the race varihad an income of $45,703 over a 5-year peri- able. With no other factors considered, blacks
od and an average net worth of $77,103 over score 8.34 points, or .6 standard deviations,
a 5-year period (see Table 2). The parents had below whites on the PIAT Mathematics
an average of approximately 13 years of edu- Assessment, a statistically significant differcation and an average occupational prestige ence.15
The control variables and the traditional variscore of 30.16 over a 5-year period. On average, the mothers had been out of the work- ables used to measure SES are added in Model
force for 2 out of the previous 5 years.
2. The larger the family size and the older the
Black-White Differences in Achievement
291
Table 1. The Variables in the Analyses: NLSY79 Mothers and Childrena
Total Sample
Variables
Dependent Variable
PIAT math score
Whites
Blacks
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
104.29
12.97
105.48
12.51
97.39
13.44
0.52
2.69
0.50
1.16
2.14
10.37
34.57
529.95
2.22
2.49
2.32
165.97
10.58
2.47
Control Variables
Delivered
by Ingenta
to 0.50
Female
0.48
0.50
0.48
User
Unknown
Number of siblings
2.50
1.03
2.47
1.01
IP: 12.217.228.119
Number of years mother
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
married (out of 5)
3.81
1.91
4.10
1.69
Age of the child
10.07
2.46
10.02
2.45
Mother’s age
35.21
2.26
35.32
2.23
Mother’s AFQT
724.11
193.80
757.66
177.90
Grandparents’
education
11.51
2.43
11.67
2.39
Independent Variables
Black
Parental education
Parental occupation
(5 years)
Years mother
unemployed
Log family income
(5 years)
Log wealth (net worth)
(5 years)
Log net worth of incomeproducing assets
(5 years)
Log net worth of
non-income-producing
assets (5 years)
Mediating Variables
Educational resources
Cultural capital
Urban
Public
Self-esteem
Social capital
aDescriptive
0.15
13.12
0.35
2.03
NA
13.17
NA
2.07
NA
12.76
NA
1.75
30.16
13.07
30.90
13.03
25.89
12.50
2.11
1.81
2.10
1.82
2.15
1.74
10.40
0.89
10.49
0.84
9.86
0.97
9.58
2.70
9.95
2.42
7.41
3.17
7.54
3.27
8.02
2.99
4.78
3.47
9.07
2.69
9.51
2.24
6.54
3.56
0.34
0.70
0.74
0.87
0.87
0.25
0.41
0.29
0.44
0.34
0.21
0.43
0.35
0.72
0.72
0.86
0.88
0.25
0.41
0.28
0.45
0.35
0.20
0.43
0.26
0.58
0.87
0.93
0.85
0.25
0.36
0.32
0.34
0.26
0.23
0.43
statistics are weighted by the child weights.
mother, the lower the achievement of the child.
Children whose mothers’ score high on the
AFQT have higher achievement themselves. As
the number of years a mother is married
increases, a child’s mathematics achievement
increases. Mathematics achievement is higher
for children whose parents have more years of
schooling and work in more prestigious occupations. Income, on the other hand, is not significant after the mother’s AFQT score and
parental occupation are controlled. As expected, the effect of race dramatically decreases in
size from Model 1 to Model 2 (dropping 6.52
points). However, the racial gap in achievement
292
Orr
Table 2. Black-White Mean Differences in Income and Wealth: NLSY79 Mothers and
Children, Five-Year Average (N = 2,098)
Measure
Total Sample
White
Black
Wealth (net worth)
Income
$77,102.89
$45,702.71
$87,545.28
$48,857.00
$16,686.49
$27,452.97
Note: The values presented for all net worth variables are based on the "true" values of
Delivered
by values.
IngentaDescriptive
to
the variables, which include negative
net worth
statistics are weighted by
the child weights.
User Unknown
IP: 12.217.228.119
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
traditional socioeco- deprivation. The
remains significant with
nomic controls in place.
Model 3 adds wealth (log of total net worth)
to the equation. The results indicate that wealth
affects mathematics achievement, even after
SES (parental education, occupation, and
income) are controlled. Children who come
from families with little or no wealth score
lower on the PIAT Mathematics Assessment
than do those from wealthier families, regardless of the parents’ income, education, and
occupation. Compared to other indicators of
SES, wealth has the largest standardized effect
on a child’s scores (the standardized coefficients
for wealth, parental education, and parental
occupation are, respectively, 0.077, 0.057, and
0.058).
The addition of wealth in this model (controlling for the variables listed earlier) decreases the coefficient for race by 15 percent.
Wealth, therefore, also explains a portion of
the black-white achievement gap. As the gap
in wealth between children increases, so will
the gap in test scores.16
The only other coefficient in the equation
to undergo significant change is that for marital status. When wealth is in the model, the
coefficient for marital status is insignificant.
This finding supports the findings of previous
studies that found financial capital to be a primary explanation for why children from single-parent households do poorly in school
(see, e.g., Downey 1994; Milne et al. 1986;
Myers et al. 1987). However, most studies
have relied only on measures of income;
when income is controlled, marital status has
often remained significant. Various theories
have been used to explain this result, such as
the allocation of resources or interpersonal
results presented here indicate that wealth may be the missing factor in
the explanation of the low achievement of
children from single-parent families.
Mediating Variables
Model 4 (Table 4) includes the mediating
variables educational resources, cultural capital, self-esteem, and social capital, as well as
the variables for school sector and location.
The greater the exposure to cultural capital,
the greater the child’s mathematics achievement. A child’s self-esteem does not appear
to affect performance on the PIAT
Mathematics Assessment. Attending a public
school or a school in an urban area has no significant effects.
Although social capital is negatively associated with mathematics achievement, the
effect is dependent on the child’s age.
Supplemental analyses indicated that children aged 10 or older whose parents have
helped them with homework score lower on
the test than do those whose parents have
not, perhaps because children who require
some type of assistance are having difficulty
in school and are predisposed to score poorly
on the mathematics test. In contrast, social
capital does not have a negative effect on
achievement for children aged 5–9 whose
parents read to them at least three times a
week.
When the mediating variables are included
in the equation, the effect of wealth shrinks
by 15 percent. Therefore, the effect of wealth
on academic achievement works, in part,
through the effect of wealth on cultural capital and social capital. To explore this finding
Black-White Differences in Achievement
293
Table 3. The Regression of PIAT Mathematics Achievement on Race, Socioeconomic
Status, and Wealth (unstandardized coefficients)a
Variables
Model 1
Constant
105.37***
(0.34)
Controls
Female
Number of siblings
Years mother married
Delivered by Ingenta
to
—
User Unknown
—
IP: 12.217.228.119
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
—
Age of the child
—
Age of the mother
—
Mother’s AFQT
—
Grandparents’ education
—
Independent Variables
Black
94.11***
(5.29)
-0.22
(0.51)
-0.59*
(0.25)
0.35*
(0.15)
-0.13
(0.10)
-0.32**
(0.13)
0.02***
(0.002)
0.18
(0.12)
-0.25
(0.51)
-0.57*
(0.25)
0.21
(0.16)
-0.14
(0.10)
-0.35**
(0.13)
0.02***
(0.002)
0.17
(0.12)
-1.54*
(0.71)
0.39*
(0.18)
0.06*
(0.03)
0.21
(0.16)
-0.35
(0.32)
0.34**
(0.12)
2,098
0.242
Parental occupation (5-year average)
—
Years mother unemployed
—
Log family income (5-year average)
—
Log wealth (net worth) (5-year average)
—
2,098
0.091
2,098
0.239
N
R-squared
Model 3
91.74***
(5.22)
-1.82*
(0.71)
0.42*
(0.18)
0.06**
(0.03)
0.19
(0.16)
-0.03
(0.32)
—
Parental education
-8.34***
(0.58)
—
Model 2
Source: NLSY79 Mothers and Children.
aStandard errors are in parentheses. Standard errors are corrected for the nonindependence of siblings.
* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001.
further, I examined the correlations between
wealth and the mediating variables. Wealth is
positively and significantly correlated with
cultural capital but is not significantly correlated with social capital.
The persistent effect of wealth may be due
to the unavailability of a measure of a child’s
educational expectations, the omitted schoolquality variables, and/or the lack of more
sophisticated measures of parental orientation toward “status seeking” and toward the
future. Each of these elements was believed
to play a role in the relationship between
wealth and achievement.
294
Orr
Table 4. The Regression of PIAT Mathematics Achievement on Race, Socioeconomic Status,
Wealth, and Mediating Variables (unstandardized coefficients)a
Variables
Model 4
Constant
93.60***
(5.50)
Controls
Female
Number of siblings
Years mother married
-0.29
(0.51)
Delivered by Ingenta
to
User Unknown -0.67**
IP: 12.217.228.119(0.25)
0.21
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
(0.16)
Age of the child
Age of the mother
Mother’s AFQT
Grandparents’ education
Independent Variables
Black
Parental education
Parental occupation (5-year average)
Years mother unemployed
Family income (5-year average)
Log wealth (net worth) (5-year average)
Mediating Variables
Educational resources
Cultural capital
Urban school
Public school
Social capital
Self-esteem
N
R-squared
-0.14
(0.11)
-0.34**
(0.13)
0.02***
(0.002)
0.12
(0.12)
-1.43*
(0.72)
0.35
(0.18)
0.06*
(0.03)
0.22
(0.16)
-0.43
(0.32)
0.29*
(0.12)
-0.19
(0.77)
2.47*
(0.99)
0.72
(0.58)
-0.90
(0.85)
-2.43***
(0.68)
2.34
(1.33)
2,098
0.253
Source: NLSY79 Mothers and Children.
Standard errors are in parentheses. Standard errors are corrected for the nonindependence of
siblings.
* p < .05. ** p < .01, ***p < .001.
Black-White Differences in Achievement
295
On one additional note, the only traditional socioeconomic variable that remains significant is parents’ occupation. The effect of parents’ education is not statistically significant
once the mediating variables are taken into
account. Although the effect of race is
reduced, it remains significant, meaning that
some of the influence of race does not work
through these additional factors. 17
Effects of Age and
Assets
a variety of factors that could contribute to
inequalities in educational opportunities,
including the characteristics of the school, the
student body, and teachers; the school facilities and curriculum; the attitudes of students;
and family background characteristics. In discussing the implications of the results of the
study, Coleman et al. made it clear that family background stood above all others as a
Delivered by contributor
Ingenta to to educational inequalities.
User
Unknown
According
to Coleman (1990:119):
Composition of
IP: 12.217.228.119
Taking all of [the] results together, one impliDate: 2004..12..08..18..05..
cation stands out above all: That schools bring
The results of the regression of achievement
on race, SES, wealth, and the interaction variable for wealth and age are presented in
Table 5. The coefficient for the interaction
between age and wealth is not significant.
Therefore, wealth does not appear to discriminate significantly among different age
groups.18
Table 6 presents the results of the regression of mathematics achievement on race,
SES, and the variables for the amount of net
worth held in income-producing and nonincome-producing assets. The net worth of
income-producing assets has a positive and
significant effect on achievement, whereas
the net worth of non-income-producing
assets is statistically insignificant. Since black
children tend to come from families that hold
a smaller amount of net worth in income-producing assets, part of the racial difference in
test scores may be attributed to the composition of assets.19
CONCLUSION
More than three decades ago, sociologist
James S. Coleman was charged by the U.S.
Department of Education with studying educational inequality between black and white
children. Specifically, he was to lead a team of
researchers in a project that would examine
“the lack of availability of equal educational
opportunities for individuals by reason of
race, color, religion, or national origin in public educational institutions at all levels in the
United States” (see Mosteller and Moynihan
1972:4–5). In Equality of Educational
Opportunity, Coleman et al. (1966) discussed
little influence to bear on a child’s achievement that is independent of his background
and general social context; and that this very
lack of an independent effect means that the
inequalities imposed on children by their
home, neighborhood, and peer environment
are carried along to become the inequalities
with which they confront adult life at the end
of school.
Over the past 37 years, Coleman et al.’s
(1966) interpretation has held up. Family
background remains a strong predictor of a
child’s achievement (see, e.g., Crane 1996;
Downey 1994; Jones 1984; Lee 1993; Milne
et al. 1986; Myers et al. 1987; Teachman
1987; Vanfossen, Jones, and Spade 1987) and
contributes to racial differences in test scores
(see, e.g., Hedges and Nowell 1998; Phillips,
Brooks-Gunn et al. 1998). Children who
come from disadvantaged families tend to
have lower achievement than do those who
come from more advantaged families. This
disadvantage does not tend to disappear as a
child progresses through school (Phillips,
Crouse, and Ralph 1998).
Although research has demonstrated that
an important link between family background
and achievement still exists, current studies
may actually underestimate these effects.
Without considering a family’s wealth,
researchers may be excluding an important
factor that contributes to a child’s achievement. The results of this study indicate that
wealth has a positive effect on achievement,
even after a family’s SES is held constant.
Wealth also explains a portion of the blackwhite differences in achievement. The results
also indicate that the impact of wealth does
not differ significantly on the basis of chil-
296
Orr
Table 5. The Regression of PIAT Mathematics Achievement on Race, Socioeconomic
Status, Wealth, and Interaction Variables (unstandardized coefficients)a
Variables
Model 5
Constant
96.99***
(6.04)
Controls
Female
Number of siblings
Years mother married
Delivered by Ingenta
to
-0.24
User Unknown (0.51)
IP: 12.217.228.119-0.58*
(0.25)
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
Age of the child
Age of the mother
Mother’s AFQT
Grandparents’ education
Independent Variables
Black
Parental education
Parental occupation (5-year average)
Years mother unemployed
Log family income (5-year average)
Log wealth (net worth) (5-year average)
Interaction Variable
Age*Wealth
N
R-squared
0.20
(0.16)
-0.42
(0.33)
-0.35**
(0.13)
0.02***
(0.002)
0.17
(0.12)
-1.55*
(0.71)
0.40*
(0.18)
0.06*
(0.03)
0.22
(0.16)
-0.34
(0.32)
-0.01
(0.38)
0.03
(0.03)
2,098
0.243
Source: NLSY79 Mothers and Children.
Standard errors are in parentheses. Standard errors are corrected for the nonindependence of siblings.
* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001.
Black-White Differences in Achievement
297
Table 6. The Regression of PIAT Mathematics Achievement on Race, Socioeconomic
Status, Wealth, and Asset Composition (unstandardized coefficients)a
Variables
Model 6
Constant
Controls
Female
Number of siblings
Years mother married
97.20***
(5.34)
Delivered by Ingenta
to
-0.23
User Unknown (0.51)
IP: 12.217.228.119-0.49
(0.25)
Date: 2004..12..08..18..05..
0.17
(0.16)
-0.13
(0.10)
-0.34**
(0.13)
0.02***
(0.002)
0.16
(0.12)
Age of the child
Age of the mother
Mother’s AFQT
Grandparents’ education
Independent Variables
Black
Parental education
Parental occupation (5-year average)
Years mother unemployed
Family income (5-year average)
Log net worth of income-producing assets
Log net worth of non-income-producing assets
N
R-squared
-1.42*
(0.72)
0.34
(0.18)
0.05*
(0.03)
0.24
(0.16)
-0.57
(0.32)
0.42***
(0.11)
0.05
(0.12)
2,098
0.245
* p < .05, **p < .01, *** p < .001.
Source: NLSY79 Mothers and Children
Standard errors are in parentheses. Standard errors are corrected for the nonindependence
of siblings.
dren’s ages and hence cannot help to explain
the widening racial gap in test scores as children progress through school.
The effect of wealth on achievement is
explained mainly by the effect of wealth on
the amount of cultural capital to which a
child is exposed. This finding supports
Bourdieu’s (1986) notion of capital: Economic
capital (wealth) can be converted into other
forms of capital (in this case, cultural capital)
298
Orr
to reproduce status. The analyses also support tem is characterized as being open—allowing
Bourdieu’s (1986) concept of liquidity: The individuals to escape the levels at which they
type of economic capital that tends to be were born—there are limits to mobility, some
cashed in is the type that is the most liquid (in of which are not based on personal strengths
this case, income-producing assets). In these or deficiencies.
analyses, the amount of wealth held in
I have shown that parental wealth is a conincome-producing assets has a significant straint on the educational resources and
effect on achievement, whereas the net worth opportunities available to a child. Since eduof non-income-producing assets does not cation is a primary avenue by which individuDelivered
Ingenta
play an important role in a child’s
achieve-by als
attain tostatus (Blau and Duncan 1967),
ment.
User Unknown
parental wealth can influence where a child
The final finding reported in this
is will be placed in the stratification system later
IP: article
12.217.228.119
that after class factors are controlled,
race
has in life. Because parental net worth is linked to
Date:
2004..12..08..18..05..
a significant negative effect on achievement. educational outcomes, children from families
Black children tend to score lower on stan- with little or no wealth are likely to remain at
dardized achievement tests than do white a lower level in the stratification hierarchy
children, even after parental income, educa- than are those from wealthier families, theretion, occupation, and wealth are taken into by reproducing, to some degree, the status
account. This effect cannot be accounted for ranking of their parents.
by other differences in family characteristics,
The fact that blacks, on average, have subsuch as family size and composition, a finding stantially different levels of wealth than do
that is consistent with that of other studies whites also demonstrates the limits of the
that have dealt with the gap in black-white achievement ideology in this country and
test scores (Jencks and Phillips 1998).
calls into question the idea that the United
States has an open stratification system. The
accumulation of wealth among the black
IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS population is limited by forces that are unrelated to achievement (see, e.g., Oliver and
A common belief held by many Americans is Shapiro 1995). Blacks face discrimination in
that if you want to be successful, all you have several markets, which limits the amount of
to do is try. Success, according to many, can wealth black families possess. Although these
be attained by any who want it badly practices are not formally sanctioned, they
enough. This perspective depicts the United are effective in limiting the life chances of
States as a meritocracy in which success is black Americans.
The lack of wealth among certain individubased on achievement, rather than on ascription, and in which opportunities to achieve als and segments of the population has
are open equally to all. The stratification sys- important consequences for these individuals
tem that exists is open, and any barriers to and groups, as well as for the society as a
success are thought to be personal, rather whole. When an entire group has limited
access to wealth, it has decreased access to
than social (MacLeod 1987).
The findings of this study, in addition to the opportunities, resources, and power that
several previous studies that have shown a wealth confers on its owners. These limitasignificant relationship between family back- tions can serve to disenfranchise an entire
ground and achievement, contradict the segment of the population, making it difficult
notion that opportunities to achieve are for them to participate fully in societal instituequally open to all individuals. The results tions and to exercise influence in such areas
indicate that ascriptive characteristics, such as as politics and the economy. This situation
parental wealth, contribute to whether or not also has negative consequences for society in
a person is successful. Despite the emergence that valuable resources are not used and the
of egalitarian ideologies, individuals in likelihood of cross-cultural misunderstandings
American society do not have equal opportu- is increased (Walsh 2000).
nities. While the American stratification sysMy findings demonstrate the importance
Black-White Differences in Achievement
299
of a multidimensional approach to the deter6. For a discussion of the differences in the
minants and consequences of stratification. measurement of wealth in various U.S. surEconomic well-being and social status can be veys, see Juster and Kuester (1991).
attained in several ways. While income, edu7. With the exception of the child’s age
cation, and occupation—the most widely and mother’s age, the variables were taken
used indicators of class position—can explain from surveys and assessments administered
a great deal about access to resources and prior to 1996.
opportunities, they are not exhaustive.
8. Since the NLSY data were not collected
In the debates over the relative influence of in 1995, when the variables were averaged
Delivered
Ingenta
class and race, it is often argued that
the num-by over
five to
years, they were averaged from
ber of blacks in the middle class hasUser
grown.
Unknown
This 1990 to 1994.
claim has been used to demonstrate
race
IP: that
12.217.228.119
9. Missing data are a major concern with
has lost its importance as a determinant
life regard to information on assets. Fortunately,
Date: of
2004..12..08..18..05..
chances for black Americans. However, when the response rate in the NLSY79 has historithe indicators of middle-class status include cally been high for the questions on owneronly income, education, and occupation, these ship of assets (approximately 99 percent for
successes are overestimated. While blacks have each). With regard to the value of assets and
come closer to parity with whites in income, debts, the response rates have also been
education, and occupation, the substantial high. In 1992, for example, the response
racial differences in wealth continue to affect rates for the value of assets ranged from 94
educational and social opportunities.
percent to 99 percent, and the response rates
for questions about debts ranged from 97
percent to 98 percent. For a further discussion, see Center for Human Resource
NOTES
Research (1997).
10. While the child’s expectations were
1. This argument is supported by the
results of Conley’s (1999, 2001) research, discussed as a possible mediator, the data set
which found that wealth is a strong predictor does not include information on expectations
for children younger than age 10. Since
of college attendance.
2. Minorities, for example, may have had adding this variable would have restricted the
experiences that have demonstrated that the sample too greatly, the impact of expectaconnection between present efforts and tions was not explored.
11. The questions asked of the mothers
future rewards is not valid and may have lost
hope in the idea that what they do in the pre- and children varied with the children’s ages.
Individual components used to construct the
sent can affect their future outcomes.
3. For simplification purposes, Phillips, mediating variables were chosen primarily
Crouse, and Ralph (1998:235–36) stated: “A from those used to construct the NLSY HOME
1.0 standard deviation gap on an IQ test is 15 Inventory Scale. While the HOME Scale is
points. A 1.0 standard deviation gap on the available for use in the analyses, I believe it is
math or verbal SAT is 100 points. Thus, a important to distinguish among the various
black-white gap of 0.80 standard deviations is types of resources and capital available to
equivalent to a 12 point gap on an IQ test or children. Therefore, new variables were created using the individual components. Some
an 80 point gap on the verbal SAT.”
4. This argument is also supported by the additional components were included on the
results of Conley’s (1999) research, which basis of a review of past research.
12. Because of the lack of better informafound that liquid (income-producing) assets
have a stronger effect on academic outcomes tion about each child’s school, school quality
than do illiquid (non-income-producing) was measured by the chosen variables.
School survey data were collected beginning
assets.
5. The PSID began to collect data on chil- in 1994–95, but only for a subset of the children, called the Child Development dren.
Supplement, only in 1997.
13. The use of the natural log of income
300
Orr
and wealth in statistical models is supported debt is not a statistically significant predictor
by past research. For example, Mayer (1997) of a child’s test scores.
used the natural log of income when consid15. The calculation for the standard deviaering the effect of income on several out- tion gap was based on the unweighted stancomes, including a child’s score on the PIAT dard deviation for the overall PIAT Mathematics
mathematics and reading assessments. After score (13.93). When weighted descriptive starunning goodness-of-fit statistics for several tistics were used in the calculation, the gap is
functional forms of income, Mayer concluded 0.62 standard deviation units.
that “the goodness-of-fit statistics are nearly
16. The models were also analyzed using
Ingenta
the same for all specifications, butDelivered
a nonlinearby scores
ontothe PIAT Reading Comprehension
User
Unknown
form usually provides a better fit than the lin- and the PIAT Reading Recognition subscales as
IP: 12.217.228.119
ear form.” The natural log of wealth
has also the dependent variables. The results were simibeen used in statistical modelsDate:
that 2004..12..08..18..05..
have lar to those found with the PIAT Mathematics
explored the effect of net worth on various subscale.
outcomes (see, e.g., Conley 1999; Henretta
17. Preliminary analyses indicated that the
and Campbell 1978).
“effects” do not differ by race.
14. It may be argued that this procedure is
18. The possible interaction between wealth
problematic, since the value of a family’s debt and age was also explored by running individmay affect a child’s achievement—the higher ual regressions for different age groups (ages
the debt, the less likely a family would be to 5–9 and 10–14). Wealth was significant in both
invest in educational resources or opportuni- regressions.
ties for a child. Separate regressions were run
19. This result is similar to the results of other
to ascertain whether the value of a family’s studies found that income-producing (liquid)
debt is a significant determinant of achieve- assets are the most important type of assets
ment. The results indicated that the value of (Conley 1999, 2001).
Black-White Differences in Achievement
301
APPENDIX
Comparison of the Limited Sample and Full Samplea
Limited Sample (N = 2,098)
Variables
Dependent Variables
PIAT mathematics score
Control Variables
Female
Number of siblings
Number of years mother
married (out of 5)
Age of the child
Mother’s age
Mother’s AFQT
Grandparents’ education
Mean
Mean
Delivered
by Ingenta
to
104.29
12.97
103.24
User Unknown
IP: 12.217.228.119
Date:0.48
2004..12..08..18..05..
0.50
0.49
Independent Variables
Black
Parental education
Parental occupation (5 years)
Years mother unemployed
Log family income (5 years)
Log wealth (net worth) (5 years)
Log net worth of incomeproducing assets (5 years)
Log net worth of non-incomeproducing assets (5 years)
Mediating Variables
Educational resources
Cultural capital
Urban
Public
Self-esteem
Social capital
SD
Full Sampleb
SD
N
13.84
3,680
2.50
1.03
2.52
0.50
1.08
3,680
3,650
3.81
10.07
35.21
724.11
11.51
1.91
2.46
2.26
193.80
2.43
3.70
9.65
35.15
698.70
11.24
1.99
2.72
2.31
208.00
2.83
3,662
3,680
3,679
3,557
3,563
0.15
13.12
30.16
2.11
10.40
9.58
0.35
2.03
13.07
1.81
0.89
2.70
0.16
12.99
29.11
2.26
10.34
9.29
0.37
2.17
14.19
1.86
0.96
2.96
2,897
3,680
3,680
3,680
3,607
3,623
7.54
3.27
7.13
3.56
3,650
9.07
2.69
8.76
3.02
3,664
0.34
0.70
0.74
0.87
0.87
0.25
0.41
0.29
0.44
0.34
0.21
0.43
0.38
0.68
0.77
0.86
0.86
0.30
0.42
0.31
0.42
0.35
0.23
0.46
3,653
3,616
3,668
3,499
3,323
3,608
Source:NLSY79 Mothers and Children.
aDescriptive statistics are weighted by the child weights.
bThe sample includes all children with a valid PIAT mathematics score in 1996.
REFERENCES
Baharudin, Rozumah, and Tom Luster. 1998.
“Factors Related to the Quality of the Home
Environment and Children’s Achievement.”
Journal of Family Issues 19:375–403.
Baker, Paula C., Canada K. Keck, Frank L. Mott, and
Stephen V. Quinlan. 1993. NLSY Child
Handbook: A Guide to the 1986-1990 National
Longitudinal Survey of Youth Child Data.
Columbus: Center for Human Resource
Research, Ohio State University.
Berndt, Thomas. 1979. “Developmental Changes
in Conformity to Peers and Parents.”
Developmental Psychology 15:608–16.
302
Orr
Blau, Peter M., and Otis Dudley Duncan. 1967. The DiMaggio, Paul. 1982. “Cultural Capital and
American Occupational Structure. New York:
School Success: The Impact of Status Culture
John Wiley & Sons.
Participation on the Grades of U.S. High
Blau, Francine D., and John W. Graham. 1990.
School Students.” American Sociological Review
“Black-White Differences in Wealth and Asset
47:189–201.
Composition.” Quarterly Journal of Economics Downey, Douglas. 1994. “The School Performance
105:321–39.
of Children from Single-Mother and SingleBourdieu, Pierre. 1977. “Cultural Reproduction
Father Families: Economic or Interpersonal
and Social Reproduction.” Pp. 487–511 in
Deprivation?” Journal of Family Issues
Power and Ideology in Education, edited by
15:129–47.
Delivered
Ingenta
to
Jerome Karabel and A. H. Halsey.
New York:by —-.
1995. “When
Bigger Is Not Better: Family Size,
User Unknown Parental Resources, and Children’s Educational
Oxford University Press.
—-. 1986. “The Forms of Capital.” Pp.
in
Performance.” American Sociological Review
IP:241–58
12.217.228.119
Handbook of Theory and Research
the
60:746–61.
Date:for2004..12..08..18..05..
Sociology of Education, edited by John G. Dunn, Lloyd M., and Frederick C. Markwardt, Jr.
Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press.
1970. Peabody Individual Achievement Test
Bryk, Anthony S., Valerie E. Lee, and Peter B.
Manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance
Holland. 1993. Catholic Schools and the
Service.
Common Good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Week. 1998. Quality Counts ‘98.
University Press.
Washington, DC: Editorial Projects in
Center for Human Resource Research, Ohio State
Education.
University. 1997. The National Longitudinal Eitzen, D. Stanley. 1975. “Athletics in the Status
Surveys NLSY79Users’ Guide. Columbus, OH:
System of Male Adolescents: A Replication of
Author.
Coleman’s ‘The Adolescent Society.’”
Coleman, James S. 1961. The Adolescent Society:
Adolescence 10(38):267–76.
The Social Life of the Teenager and Its Impact on Elkind, David. 1967. “Egocentrism in Adolescence.”
Education. New York: Free Press.
Child Development 38: 1025-1034.
—-. 1988. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Eller, T. J. 1994. Household Wealth and Asset
Capital.” American Journal of Sociology
Ownership: 1991: Current Population Reports
94:95–120.
(Series P-70, No. 34). Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
—-. 1990. Equality and Achievement in Education.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Ferguson, Ronald F. 1999, November. “Racial TestColeman, James S., Ernest Q. Campbell, Carol J.
Score Trends 1971–1996, Popular Youth
Hobson, James McPartland, Alexander M.
Culture
and
Community
Academic
Mood, Frederic D. Weinfeld, and Robert L. York.
Standards.” Paper presented at the annual
1966. Equality of Educational Opportunity.
conference of the Institute for Educational
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Initiatives, Notre Dame, Indiana, November
Office.
1999.
Coleman, James S., Kathryn Schiller, and Barbara Goldberg, Alan, and Timothy Chandler. 1989.
Schneider. 1993. “Parent Choice and
“The Role of Athletics: The Social World of
Inequality.” Pp. 147–82 in Parents, Their
High School Adolescents.” Youth and Society
21:238–50.
Children, and Schools, edited by Barbara
Schneider and James S. Coleman. Boulder, Hao, Lingxin. 1995. “Poverty, Public Assistance,
CO: Westview Press.
and Children in Intact and Single-Mother
Conley, Dalton. 1999. Being Black, Living in the Red:
Families.” Journal of Family and Economic Issues
Race, Wealth, and Social Policy in America.
16(2–3):181–205.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hauser, Robert, and Douglas Anderson. 1991.
—-. 2001. “Capital for College: Parental Assets and
“Post-High School Plans and Aspirations of
Postsecondary Schooling.” Sociology of
Black and White High School Seniors:
Education 72:59–72.
1976–86.” Sociology of Education 64:263–77.
Costanzo, Philip. 1970. “Conformity Development Hedges, Larry V., and Amy Nowell. 1998. “Blackas a Function of Self-Blame.” Journal of
White Test Score Convergence Since 1965.”
Personality and Social Psychology 14:366–74.
Pp. 149–81 in The Black-White Test Score Gap,
Crane, Jonathan. 1996. “Effects of Home
edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith
Environment, SES, and Maternal Test Scores
Phillips. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute
on Mathematics Achievement.” Journal of
Press.
Educational Research 89:305–14.
Henretta, John C., and Richard T. Campbell. 1978.
Black-White Differences in Achievement
303
“Net Worth as an Aspect of Status.” American Myers, David, Ann Milne, Keith Baker, and Alan
Journal of Sociology 83:1204–23.
Ginsburg. 1987. “Student Discipline and High
Hoffer, Thomas B. 1997–98. “Social Background and
School Performance.” Sociology of Education
Achievement in Public and Catholic High
60:18–33.
Schools.” Social Psychology of Education 2:7–23.
Natriello, Gary, and Edward McDill. 1986.
Jencks, Christopher, and Phillips, Meredith, eds.
“Performance Standards, Student Effort on
1998. The Black-White Test Score Gap.
Homework, and Academic Achievement.”
Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Sociology of Education 59:18–31.
Jones, Lyle. 1984. “White-Black Achievement Okun, Morris, and Joseph H. Sasfy. 1977.
Differences.” American Psychologist 39(11):
“Adolescence, the Self-Concept, and Formal
Delivered by Ingenta
to
1207–13.
Operations.”
Adolescence 12:373–79.
User Unknown
Juster, F. Thomas, and Kathleen A. Kuester.
1991. Oliver, Melvin, and Thomas Shapiro. 1989. “Race
“Differences in the Measurement
Wealth,
and Wealth.” Review of Black Political Economy
IP:of12.217.228.119
Wealth Inequality, and Wealth Date:
Composition
17:79–91.
2004..12..08..18..05..
Obtained from Alternative U.S. Wealth —-. 1995. Black Wealth/White Wealth: A New
Surveys.” Review of Income & Wealth 37(1):33Perspective on Racial Inequality. New York:
62.
Routledge.
Kaestner, Robert. 1997. “Are Brothers Really Phillips, Meredith, Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Greg J.
Better? Sibling Sex Composition and
Duncan, Pamela Klebanov, and Jonathan
Educational Achievement Revisited.” Journal of
Crane. 1998. “Family Background, Parenting
Human Resources 32:250–84.
Practices, and the Black-White Test Score
Kane, Thomas J. 1998. “Racial and Ethnic
Gap.” Pp. 103–45 in The Black-White Test Score
Preferences in College Admissions.” Pp.
Gap, edited by Christopher Jencks and
431–56 in The Black-White Test Score Gap,
Meredith Phillips. Washington, DC: Brookings
edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith
Institute Press.
Phillips. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Phillips, Meredith, James Crouse, and John Ralph.
Press.
1998. “Does the Black-White Test Score Gap
Lee, Seh-Ahn. 1993. “Family Structure Effects on
Widen after Children Enter School?” Pp.
Student Outcomes.” Pp. 43–75 in Parents,
229–72 in The Black-White Test Score Gap,
Their Children, and Schools, edited by Barbara
edited by Christopher Jencks and Meredith
Phillips. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute
Schneider and James S. Coleman. Boulder,
CO: Westview Press.
Press.
Liu, Xiaoru, Howard Kaplan, and Will Risser. 1992. Rodgers, Joseph Lee, David C. Rowe, and Kim May.
“Decomposing the Reciprocal Relationships
1994. “DF Analysis of NLSY IQ/Achievement
between Academic Achievement and General
Data: Nonshared Environmental Influences.”
Self-Esteem.” Youth and Society 24:123–48.
Intelligence 19:157–77.
Luster, Tom, and Harriette Pipes McAdoo. 1994. Schultz, Clarence. 1990. “The Adolescent Society
“Factors Related to the Achievement and
Revisited.” Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology
Adjustment of Young African American
18(1):3–12.
Children.” Child Development 65:1080–94.
Steinberg, Lawrence, and Susan Silverberg. 1986.
MacLeod, Jay. 1987. Ain’t No Makin’ It: Leveled
“The Vicissitudes of Autonomy in Early
Aspirations in a Low-Income Neighborhood.
Adolescence.” Child Development 57: 841–51.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sterbin, Allan, and Ernest Rakow. 1996, November.
Mayer, Susan E. 1997. What Money Can’t Buy:
“Self-Esteem, Locus of Control, and Student
Family Income and Children’s Life Chances.
Achievement.” Paper presented at the annual
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
meeting of the Mid-South Educational
Merida, Kevin. 1995, October 9. “Worry,
Research Association, Tuscaloosa, Alabama.
Frustration Build for Many in the Black Middle Teachman, Jay. 1987. “Family Background,
Class.” Washington Post, pp. A1, A22–A23.
Educational Resources, and Educational
Milne, Ann, David Myers, Alvin Rosenthal, and Alan
Attainment.” American Sociological Review
Ginsburg. 1986. “Single Parents, Working
52:548–57.
Mothers, and the Educational Achievement of Tracy, Mary E. 2001. Mission and Money: A CHS
School Children.” Sociology of Education
Report on Finance, Advancement, and
59:125–39.
Governance. Washington, DC: National
Mosteller, Frederick, and Daniel P. Moynihan.
Catholic Education Association.
1972. On Equality of Educational Opportunity. Vanfossen, Beth, James Jones, and Joan Spade.
New York: Random House.
1987. “Curriculum Tracking and Status
304
Orr
Maintenance.” Sociology of Education
In Social Stratification: Class, Race, and Gender
60:104–22.
in Sociological Perspective, edited by David B.
Veblen, Thorstein. 1934. The Theory of the Leisure
Grusky. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. (Original
Class. New York: Random House.
work published 1949)
Walker, Lynn, and John Greene. 1986. “The Social
Weber, Max. 1946. From Max Weber: Essays in
Context of Adolescent Self-Esteem.” Journal of
Sociology Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills (eds.
Youth and Adolescence 15:315–22.
and trans.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Walsh, Mary Williams. 2000, March 25. “Net
White,
Halbert. 1980. “A Heteroskedastic-Consistent
Worth Shrinking Despite Boom Times.” Los
Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test of
Angeles Times, p. A16.
to
Warner, W. Lloyd. 1994. “Social ClassDelivered
in America.”by Ingenta
Heteroskedasticity.”
Econometrica, 48:817–38.
User Unknown
IP: 12.217.228.119
Amy J. Orr, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor
of Sociology, Department of Sociology and Anthropology,
Date:
Linfield College, McMinnville, Oregon.
Her2004..12..08..18..05..
main fields of interest are education, race and ethnicity,
gender, and social policy. She is currently conducting further research on wealth and achievement,
retention of minority students, and college writing.
The author thanks Maureen Hallinan, Richard Williams, David Hachen, Felicia LeClere, and Warren
Kubitschek for their comments and suggestions and John Bauer for statistical support. Address correspondence to Amy J. Orr, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Linfield College, 900 SE
Baker Street, McMinnville, OR 97128; e-mail: aorr@linfield.edu.