Closing Achievement Gaps:
Research-Based Lessons for
Educators
Joseph Murphy
Vanderbilt University joseph.f.murphy@vanderbilt.edu
(615) 322-8038

Part A.
Portrayals of Gaps

NAEP Long-Term Math (Age 13)
290
280
270
260
250
240
230
1973 1978 1982 1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004
(46) (42) (34) (25) (27) (29) (29) (29) (32) (26)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

NAEP Main Math (Grade 8)
290
280
270
260
250
240
230
1990 1992 1996 2000 2003 2005 2007
(33) (40) (41) (40) (35) (34) (31)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

NAEP Long-Term Reading (Age 13)
270
260
250
240
230
220
210
1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004
(36) (31) (27) (18) (20) (28) (31) (32) (29) (22)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

NAEP Main Reading (Grade 8)
290
280
270
260
250
240
230
1992 1994 1998 2002 2003 2005 2007
(29) (30) (26) (27) (26) (28) (26)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

NAEP Long-Term Math (Age 17)
290
280
270
260
320
310
300
1973 1978 1982 1986 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004
(40) (38) (32) (29) (21) (26) (26) (27) (32) (28)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

NAEP Math (Grade 12)
320
310
300
290
280
270
260
1990 1992 1996 2000
(32) (29) (31) (33)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

NAEP Long-Term Reading (Age 17)
300
290
280
270
260
250
240
1975 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1999 2004
(52) (50) (31) (21) (30) (36) (30) (29) (31) (29)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

NAEP Reading (Grade 12)
300
290
280
270
260
250
240
1992 1994 1998 2002 2005
(23) (29) (26) (25) (25)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

Calculus AB (AP Exam)
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
4
3.5
3
2.5
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
(.85) (.96) (.97) (.99) (1.06) (1.07) (1.11) (1.10) (1.08) (1.11) (1.14)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Puerto
Rican

Calculus BC (AP Exam)
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
(.76) (.78) (.80) (.86) (.85) (.82) (.89) (.74) (.97) (.75) (1.03)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Puerto Rican

English Language (AP Exam)
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
(.79) (.87) (.84) (.96) (.91) (.91) (.84) (.89) (.93) (.89) (.96)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Puerto
Rican

English Literature (AP Exam)
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
(.90) (.87) (1.42) (.98) (.90) (.97) (.92) (.94) (1.02) (1.02) (.78)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Puerto Rican

SAT Mathematics
540
520
500
480
460
440
420
400
1987 1991 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
(103) (103) (105) (105) (111)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

SAT Critical Reading/Verbal
540
520
500
480
460
440
420
400
19
87
19
91
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
(96) (92) (96) (99) (98)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

ACT Composite Score Trends
23
21
19
17
15
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
(4.3) (4.4) (4.6) (4.7) (5.2)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

High School Completion
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004
(23.0) (17.2) (14.1) (12.5) (9.8) (6.1) (7.0) (9.8) (5.8) (5.4) (6.3) (4.5)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

Drop-Out Rates (CPS)
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005
(9.0) (11.5) (8.3) (7.0) (4.5) (3.7) (4.2) (5.9) (5.7) (5.3) (4.8) (4.4)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

B.A. Completion
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004
(12.2) (15.3) (13.8) (13.4) (11.6) (13.4) (13.7) (16.2) (13.4) (16.5) (15.2) (17.4)
Year (Gap)
White
Black
Hispanic

Why is it important?
•
•
Individual
Society

Individual: Educational Attainment
• Increased chance of falling behind in school
• Higher dropout rate
• Reduced enrollment in college
• Less likelihood of college degree

“Over a third of the low SES group and just 3 percent of the high group are ‘permanent dropouts,’ meaning high school dropouts who at approximately age 22 still lack high school certification of any type. Whereas almost 60 percent of the high SES group attended a four-year college by age 22, just 7 percent low SES youth did.” (Alexander, et al., 2007)
“Horribly, NAEP data indicate that, on average, Black students are leaving high school ‘with less mathematical knowledge than white 8th graders possess.’” (Hughes, 2003)

Individual: Employment Opportunity
• Limited career path
• Concentration in low-paying positions

Individual: Wages
• Lower wages

The gap has shifted from being an indicator of educational inequality to a direct cause of socioeconomic inequality.

Society: Economic
• Reduced economic competitiveness
• Lower standard of living
• Impediment to productivity and performance
• Contribution to decline in economic health

• If the minority-white gap had been closed between 1983 and 1998:
• GDP would have been $310 - $525 billion higher (2 - 4% of GDP) in 2008 dollars
• If the SES gap had been closed between
1983 and 1998:
• GDP would have been $400 - $600 billion higher (3 - 5% of GDP) in 2008 dollars

Society: Social Well-Being
• Reinforces social inequality and exacerbates social justice problems
• Reduces ties that bind society
• Damages political fabric of democracy

Part B.
Insights and Rules for Closing
Achievement Gaps:
General Rules of Engagement

Four Sets of Findings
•
•
•
• Big Picture Conclusions
Factors to Emphasize
Timing
Cautions

K 4 8 12
50% 75% 100%
+25% +25%
White
Black

4
Summer
K – 1
Summer
1 – 2
Summer
Summer
3 – 4
2 – 3
Summer
4 – 5
2
3
2
3
2
1 1
1
(Preschool)
Period A
(Age 0-5)
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
(K – 5)
Period B
( Age 6 – 11)
(6 – 12)
Period C
(Age 12 – 18)

10
8
6
4
2
0
0
18
16
14
12
5/6 9/10.
K 3 – 4
50% of gap 25% of gap
White
Black

10
8
6
4
2
0
0
18
16
14
12 school
White
Black
5/6 9/10.
K 3 – 4
50% of gap 25% of gap

Much of the solution is to be found in factors external to the school, but schooling social policy schools have a part to play.

Schools have not been especially effective in helping close achievement gaps.

Deep-Seated, Long-Standing,
Hard-to-Solve Problem
• Historically not a frontburner issue
• An unwillingness to see the issue in ethical terms
• A reluctance to re-set priorities and re-allocate resources

Since low-income and minority students are more schooldependent than their more advantaged peers, there is potential for schools to help solve the problem.

What School Dependency Means
•
•
These youngsters are more advantaged in general when schools do things well
These youngsters are more disadvantaged in general when schools do not do things well

Factors

A focus on both out-of-school and in-school factors is required.

Schools did not cause the gaps.
They cannot solve gap problems alone.

A combination of factors is required to close achievement gaps.

Silver Bullet

Better instruction
Stronger culture
(academic press)
Lower class size
More personalization
Greater curricular rigor

Students do not need
“different” types of interventions.
They require more intensive support.

Academic and Environmental Factors
Need to be Addressed in Tandem
•
•
Instructional program
Culture
“Ultimately, programs that rely entirely on increasing academic standards without parallel attention to social-emotional factors associated with achievement motivation and performance will be less likely to improve student achievement outcomes.” (Becker and Luther, 2002)

We need to concentrate on those factors that disproportionately advantage low-income and minority students.

20
10
0
40
30
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
70
60
50 factors disproportionately advantage low-income and minority students factors help all students the same

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Preschool programs
Cooperative instructional strategies
Smaller class sizes
Quality instruction
Co-curricular/extra curricular activities
More rigorous courses
Placement in high SES schools (school composition)
Minority teachers/working class teachers
Parent help with homework
Protective, supportive, risk-free environment
Service learning
High teacher expectations

Smaller Class Size
•
•
•
• Ferguson, 1998
Finn, 1998
Finn & Achilles, 1990
Grissmar, 1998
•
•
•
Kruger & Whitmore
Rothstein, 2004
Slavin & Madden, 2006
• More beneficial for minority than non-minority students
• Largest for disadvantaged students
•
Greater for students attending inner-city schools

Quality Instruction
“The impact of the teacher is far greater for minority students…Good teachers can have a differentially positive effect on minority students.” (Singham, 2003)

Curricular Rigor
•
•
•
Minority and low-income students see to benefit more than others from stronger course requirements.
(Thompson, 2002)
Content standards have a positive effect on average achievement; the gains [are] especially large more minority students. (Harris & Hertert, 2006)
The gains from taking a more demanding mathematics curriculum are even greater for African
American and Latino students than for white students. (Thompson & O’Quinn, 2001)

Service Learning
•
•
“Service learning may be especially attractive to principals of low SES schools, in part because it may be related to higher achievement generally and to smaller achievement gaps between higher and lower income students.” (Scales, et al., 2006)
“[C]ommunity service appears to be related to a smaller achievement gap between students from lower and higher income backgrounds. Moreover, experiencing service-learning for at least a few weeks appears to be related to a smaller gap in most academic outcomes between low and high-SES students.” (Scales, et al., 2006)

Some factors carry more weight than others.

All factors are not equal in closing the gap.
Some have more power to reduce discrepancies.
•
•
Opportunity to learn
Quality instruction

An integrated, coherent, cohesive, overlapping design works best.

after school tutoring program master teachers service learning ninth grade academy summer support, grades 8 and 9 acceleration + remediation design extra services…double sessions co-curricular involvement faculty advisors extended schooling

There is no short-term solution.

Early interventions trump later interventions.

The place to solve the
“9th grade problem” is in preschool.

ball ball
8 th grade vs.
12 th grade

Later:
•
•
•
• Problems are harder
Problems are more entrenched
Problems are less malleable
Problems have infected multiple domains
(e.g., reading problem
 motivation
 engagement); an early problem of 1 or 2 things becomes a later problem of 5 or 6 things

Some factors carry more weight in certain periods of the school career.
•
•
High teacher expectations are more powerful in PreK-4
High personalization is more powerful in grades 8-12

Length of time in treatment is important.

Quality Instruction (concept portrait)
6
Units of Be nefit
5
4
3
2
1
9
8
7
0 instruction units added eighth grade
2 eighth & ninth grades
5
Grades eighth, ninth, & tenth grades
9

Prevention trumps remediation.

Acceleration + remediation trumps remediation.

lesson #1 instruction
 learning problem arises lesson #2 instruction lesson #1 instruction
 learning problem arises lesson #2 instruction

One rarely arrives -do not withdraw supports.

Use of Categories
•
•
Lumping minorities together
Aggregating diverse groups within categories
• Ignoring individual differences

Lumping groups into
“minority” status is problematic.

Sub-Group Scores
Mask Differences
• Many groups in Hispanic and Asian designations

We need to remember that we are talking about averages.

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Black White

Factors are not uniformly effective for all forms of the gap.

There is a need to surface potential unintended consequences.

move : enhance accountability via testing strategy
: move most effective teachers to “tested” grades consequences : ???
move : enhance academic rigor strategy : detrack consequence : ???
move : create culturally responsive culture strategy : establish AA center/club consequence : ???

Costs as well as benefits of gap reduction strategies need to be weighed.
Ninth grade academy? Salary supplement for teachers working in schools with high concentrations of lowincome students? Additional AP courses?

Do not lose sight of the real goal (forest) when focusing on the gaps (trees).

The core issue is addressing underachievement.

Three Dimensions of Achievement
•
•
•
Level
Equity
Value added

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
K
4
3.5
3
2.5
1
1.2
0.6
2
2.4
1.2
3
Years of School gap .6 1.2 1.4
VALUE ADDED
3.8
2.4
White
Black

4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
K 1
0.6
0.4
2
1.2
0.8
Years of S chool gap .2 .4 .3
LEVEL
3
1.6
1.3
White
Black

Absolute vs. Relative Gain

13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
8
Absolute
Relative
• Rate of change: black white
• Black achievement as % of white achievement
3.0
63%
Relative vs. Absolute Change
Grade Level
12
3.5
70%
+.5
60%
44% white black

Do not count on luck, prayer, magic, or martyrs to solve the problem.

Focus
All
Students
ACTIONS
Enhancement Actions Barrier-Removal Actions
Help All Equally Help Low-SES More Help All Equally Help Low-SES More
[1]
•
Align curriculum
• Deepen PD for
Teachers
[2]
• Provide academic summer school
• Use cooperative learning strategies
• Raise teacher expectations
• Add time to school day
[3] [4]
• Detrack
• Re-culture discriminatory discipline culture
• Remove transportation barriers for more co-curricular opportunities
• Reduce class size
Targeted
Students
[5] [6]
•
Provide supplemental tutoring
• Target additional instructional time
• Form cultural similar clubs (AA)
[7] [8]
• Remove barriers that prevent parents from participating with school

Part C.
Causes of Achievement Gaps

I. Introduction
A. Starting point
B. Frames of investigation
1. Categorical
2. Theoretical
3. Core frame a) family/society (non-school) b) school

4. Our frame a) SES b) family c) community d) individual factors e) peers f) racial discrimination g) ???
h) schooling

Social and
Economic Context
Out-of-School
Educational
Experiences
Community Context
Peer
Context
Racial
Context
Achievement
Gap
Family
Context
Figure 3.1 Causes of the Achievement Gap
K-12
Educational
Context
Individual
Context