CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP University of the State of New York Albany, NY November, 2005

CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAPUniversity of the State of New YorkAlbany, NY November, 2005

Every year, thousands of children head toward school

already behind.

2005 NAEP Grade 4 ReadingAll Students, Nation

38

33

30

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All Students

Perc

en

t o

f S

tud

en

ts

Proficient/Advanced

Basic

Below Basic

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP Data Explorer, http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/

2005 NAEP Grade 4 Readingby Race/Ethnicity, Nation

59

28

56 51

25

29

32

2930

35

13

40

15 18

40

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AfricanAmerican

Asian Latino NativeAmerican

White

Perc

ent

of

Stu

dents

Proficient/Advanced

Basic

Below Basic


2005 NAEP Grade 4 Readingby Family Income, Nation

54

23

30

35

15

42

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Poor Non-Poor

Perc

en

t o

f S

tud

en

ts

Proficient/Advanced

Basic

Below Basic


Sadly, rather than organizing our educational system to

ameliorate this problem, we organize it to exacerbate the

problem.

How?

By giving students who arrive with less, less in school, too.

Some of these “lesses” are a result of choices that policymakers make.

New York: Universal Pre-K?

Age Percent Served in HS, UPK, EPK

4 year olds 56%

3 year olds 14%

New York State: Huge Inequities in State and Local Revenue Per

StudentGap Nationa

l Rank

High Poverty vs. Low Poverty Districts

-$2,040 per student

#1

High Minority vs. Low Minority Districts

-$1,797 per student

#3

Source: The Funding Gap, 2004, by Kevin Carey. Data are for 2002

Gaps of This Sort Translate Into…

Per Typical Classroom of 25

-$65,375

Per Typical Elementary School of 400

-$1,046,000

Even at the higher education level, we spend less per student in the institutions where most

low-income students start.

Expenditures per student

2 Year Colleges $9,183

4 Year Colleges $27,973

Source: NCES Digest of Education Statistics, 2003

But some of these “lesses” are a function of choices that

we educators make.

Source: Prospects (ABT Associates, 1993), in “Prospects: Final Report on Student Outcomes”, PES, DOE, 1997.

Students in Poor Schools Receive ‘A’s for Work That Would Earn ‘Cs’ in Affluent

Schools87

35

56

34 41

22 21

11

0

100

Per

cent

ile -

CT

BS

4

A B C DGrades

Seventh Grade Math

Low-poverty schools High-poverty schools

Source: CCSSO, State Indicators of Science and Mathematics Education, 2001

Fewer Latino students are enrolled

in Algebra 2

45

62

0

80

1998

Per

cen

t En

rolle

d

Latino

White

Math and Science Classes of Mostly Minority Students Are More Often Taught by Misassigned Teachers

54%

86%

42%

69%

0%

100%

90-100% Non-White 90-100% White

Certified in Field BA or BS in Field

Source: Jeannie Oakes. Multiplying Inequalities: The Effects of Race, Social Class, and Tracking on Opportunities to Learn Mathematics and Science (Rand: 1990)

Poor and Minority Students Get More Inexperienced*

Teachers

20%

11%

21%

10%

0%

25%

High-poverty schools Low-poverty schools

High-minority schools Low-minority schools

*Teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience. “High” and “low” refer to top and bottom quartiles.Source: National Center for Education Statistics, “Monitoring Quality: An Indicators Report,” December 2000.

New York State: Low Income Students 4 Times as Likely to be

Taught by Teachers Not Certified in Any of their Current Assignments

4%

17%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Non-Poor

Poor

Lankford, Loeb and Wykoff. “Teacher Sorting and the Plight of Urban Schools: A Descriptive Analysis.” 2002

New York State: Minority Students 3 Times as Likely to be Taught by Teachers Who Failed Licensure

Exams at Least Once

7%

21%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

White

Non-White

Lankford, Loeb and Wykoff. “Teacher Sorting and the Plight of Urban Schools: A Descriptive Analysis.” 2002

Results are devastating.

Kids who come in a little behind, leave a lot behind.

By end of high school?

African American and Latino 17 Year-Olds Do Math at Same Levels

As White 13 Year-Olds

0%

100%

200 250 300 350

Average Scale Score

Per

cent

of

Stud

ents

White 13 Year-Olds African American 17 Year-Olds Latino 17-Year Olds

African American and Latino 17 Year-Olds Read at Same Levels As

White 13 Year-Olds

0%

100%

150 200 250 300 350

Average Scale Score

Per

cent

of

Stud

ents

White 13 Year-Olds African American 17 Year-Olds Latino 17 Year-Olds

These patterns are reflected, too, in high

school completion, college entry and college graduation rates.

Students Graduate From High School At Different Rates, 2001*

* 4-Year Graduation Rates

Source: Jay P. Greene and Greg Forster, “Public High School Graduation and College Readiness Rates in the United States,” Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, September 2003.

54%51%

79%

52%

72%

0%

100%

African American Asian Latino Native American White

Of Every 100 White Kindergartners:

93 Graduate from high school

65 Complete at least some college

33 Obtain at least a Bachelor’s Degree

(25-to 29-Year-Olds)

Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. March Current Population Surveys, 1971-2001, in The Condition of Education 2002.

Of Every 100 African American Kindergartners:

87 Graduate from High School

50 Complete at Least Some College

18 Obtain at Least a Bachelor’s Degree


Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. March Current Population Survey, 1971-2001, In The Condition of Education 2002.

Of Every 100 Latino Kindergartners:

63 Graduate from high school

32 Complete at least some college



Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. March Current Population Surveys, 1971-2001, In The condition of Education 2002.

Of Every 100 American Indian/Alaskan Native

Kindergartners:

58 Graduate from High School


(24 Year Olds)

College Graduates by Age 26

Young People From High Income Families

75%

Young People From Low Income Families

8%

Source: Tom Mortenson, Post Secondary Opportunity, 2004.

These patterns are part—but by no means all—

of the reason why we are falling behind other

developed countries.

TIMSS

Source: NCES 1999-081R, Highlights From TIMSS

Nations' Average Science Performance Compared with the U.S.

0%

50%

100%

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Nations scoring higher than the U.S.

Nations scoring the same as the U.S.

Nations scoring below the U.S.

Source: NCES 1999-081R, Highlights From TIMSS

Nations' Average Mathematics Performance Compared with the U.S.

0%

50%

100%

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Nations' scoring higher than the U.S.

Nations scoring the same as the U.S.

Nations scoring below the U.S.

PISA

US 15 Year-Olds Rank Near Middle Of The Pack Among 32 Participating Countries:

1999

U.S. RANKREADING 15TH

MATH 19TH

SCIENCE 14TH

2003: U.S. Ranked 24th out of 29 OECD Countries in Mathematics

300

350

400

450

500

550

Fin

lan

dK

ore

aN

eth

erla

nds

Japa

nC

ana

daB

elgi

um

Sw

itzer

land

New

Ze

ala

ndA

ustr

alia

Cze

ch R

epu

blic

Icel

and

Den

mar

kF

ranc

eS

wed

en

Aus

tria

Ger

man

yIr

ela

ndO

EC

D A

vera

geS

lova

ck R

epu

blic

Nor

way

Luxe

mbo

urg

Pol

and

Hun

gar

yS

pain

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Por

tuga

l

Italy

Gre

ece

Tu

rkey

Mex

ico

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results , data available at http://www.oecd.org/

Problems are not limited to our high-poverty and high-

minority schools . . .

U.S. Ranks Low in the Percent of Students in the Highest Achievement Level (Level 6)

in Math

0

2

4

6

8

10

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results, data available at http://www.oecd.org/

U.S. Ranks 23rd out of 29 OECD Countries in the Math Achievement of the Highest-

Performing Students*

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

Bel

giu

mJa

pan

Kor

ea

Sw

itzer

land

Net

her

land

sN

ew Z

eal

and

Fin

lan

dA

ustr

alia

Can

ada

Cze

ch R

epu

blic

Den

mar

kS

wed

en

Ger

man

yO

EC

D A

VE

RA

GE

Aus

tria

Icel

and

Fra

nce

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Nor

way

Hun

gar

yLu

xem

bour

gIr

ela

ndP

olan

dU

nite

d S

tate

sS

pain

Italy

Tu

rkey

Por

tuga

lG

reec

eM

exic

o

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

* Students at the 95th PercentileSource: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results , data available at http://www.oecd.org/

U.S. Ranks 23rd out of 29OECD Countries in the Math

Achievement of High-SES Students

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Bel

giu

mN

eth

erla

nds

Fin

lan

dC

zech

Re

pub

licC

ana

daJa

pan

Kor

ea

Sw

itzer

land

Aus

tral

iaG

erm

any

New

Ze

ala

ndF

ranc

eD

enm

ark

Sw

ede

nA

ustr

iaH

ung

ary

OE

CD

AV

ER

AG

ES

lova

k R

epub

licLu

xem

bour

gIr

ela

ndIc

ela

ndP

olan

dN

orw

ayU

nite

d S

tate

sS

pain

Por

tuga

lIta

lyG

reec

eT

urk

eyM

exic

o

Ave

rag

e S

cale

Sco

re

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results, data available at http://www.oecd.org/

Problems not limited to math, either.

2003 PISA Problem-Solving Results: US #23

Source: OECD, PISA. Problem Solving for Today’s World. 2004

55% of our 15 year olds at problem-solving level 1 or

below.Closest other country?

LATVIA

There is one measure on which we rank high.

Inequality!

Source: OECD, Knowledge and Skills for Life: First Results From PISA 2000, 2001.

*Of 27 OECD countries

Performance Of U.S.15 Year-Olds Highly Variable

PISA 5th – 95th

Gap Rank*Reading (interpreting text) 3

Mathematical Literacy 6 (tie)

Science Literacy 7

But don’t we “make it up by having the best higher

education system in the world” and “sending far more

of our young people to college” than anybody else?

Education Attainment: Then and Now

1970s 2003

Tertiary Completion* #1 #7

OECD-Education at a Glance (Sept 2005)

College Completion Over Time

1970 2001

United States 30% 39%

Ireland 20% 48%

Canada 30% 45%

Spain 16% 36%

United Kingdom

19% 29%

College Graduates Last Year

China 2.5 million

India 2.3 million

US 1.3 million

Can we do better?

What We Hear Many Educators Say:

• They’re poor;• Their parents don’t care;• They come to schools without

breakfast; • Not enough books• Not enough parents . . .

The Postsecondary Equivalent?

• They enter without the necessary skills;

• They have to work to support their families;

• Their peers and families don’t support and value their struggle…

But if they are right, why are low-income students and

students of color performing so high in some schools…

Central Elementary

Paintsville, KY

Central Elementary

• 71% Low-Income

• 99% White

• Outperformed the district and state in 4th grade reading and 5th grade math in 2003

• Made considerable gains in 4th grade reading and 5th grade math scores

Making Gains at Central 4th Grade Reading

87%

100%96%

52%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100% %

Pro

ficie

nt

an

d A

bove

2000 2001 2002 2003

Source: The Department of Education, http://www.schoolresults.org/

Making Gains at Central 5th Grade Math

81%

93% 94%

23%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

% P

rofi

cie

nt

an

d A

bo

ve

2000 2001 2002 2003

Source: The Department of Education, http://www.schoolresults.org/

Centennial Place Elementary School

Atlanta, Georgia

• 92% African American• 64% Low-Income• Performed in the top 2% of Georgia

schools in 4th grade reading in 2003• Performed in top 7 % of Georgia

schools in 4th grade math in 2003

Source: Georgia Department of Education, http://www.doe.k12.ga.us Dispelling the Myth Online, http://www.edtrust.org School Information Partnership, http://www.schoolresults.org

High Achievement at Centennial Place2004 Reading Composite

94 94 92

0

20

40

60

80

100

All African

American

Low Income

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Source: Georgia Department of Education, http://www.doe.k12.ga.us

High Achievement at Centennial Place2004 Math Composite

89 88 84

0

20

40

60

80

100

All African

American

Low Income

Per

cent

Pro

ficie

nt

Source: Georgia Department of Education, http://www.doe.k12.ga.us

University Park High SchoolWorcester, MA

• Grades 7-12;• 70+% poverty;• 50% ELL;• Most students enter at least two

grade levels behind.

University Park Results: 2004

• Only one 10th grader didn’t pass MA high school exit exam on first attempt (turned out, didn’t attend the school).

• 87% passed at advanced or proficient level.

• Fifth most successful school in the state, surpassing many schools serving wealthy students.

Source: Education Trust analysis of data from National School-Level State Assessment Score Database (www.schooldata.org).

Poverty vs. Achievement in Kentucky Elementary Schools

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent FRPL

Ele

me

nta

ry M

ath

Per

ce

nti

le S

co

re



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent FRPL

Ele

me

nta

ry M

ath

Pe

rce

nti

le S

co

re


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent FRPL

Ele

me

nta

ry M

ath

Pe

rce

nti

le S

co

re


Source: Education Trust analysis of data from National School-Level State Assessment Score Database (www.schooldata.org).Data are from 2002.

Poverty vs. Achievement in Michigan Elementary Schools

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent Low-Income Students

Pe

rce

nt

4th

Gra

de

rs M

ee

tin

g S

tan

da

rd i

n M

ath

Poverty vs. Achievement in New York: 4th Grade Math

Guess What?Also very big differences in

college results…even among those who serve “same”

kinds of students.

Doc/Research Institutions With Similar Students Getting

Different ResultsMedian SAT

Size % Pell

Overall 6 Yr-Grad Rate

White/URM Grad Rate Gap

Penn State 1195

33,975

19%

83% -14%

Univ of Wisconsin

1240

27,711

12%

76% -21%

Texas A & M

1185

33,901

14%

75% -9%

Univ of Washington

1185

25,059

21%

71% -11%

Univ of Minnesota

1145

28,273

16%

54% -19%

Masters Level Institutions With Similar Students Getting Different

ResultsMedian SAT

Size % Pell Overall 6 Yr-Grad Rate

URM 6-Yr Grad Rate

Millersville U of PA

1055 6369

19% 66% 46%

SUNY at Plattsburgh

1045 5130

33% 59% 52%

NW MO State

1010 5043

27% 53% 44%

Northern Michigan U

1010 7831

32% 45% 38%

Steven Austin (TX)

1025 8871

31% 35% 30%

Bac General/Masters Institutions With Similar Students Getting

Different ResultsMedian SAT

Size % Pell Overall 6 Yr-Grad Rate

URM 6-Yr Grad Rate

Elizabeth City (NC)

810 2039 60% 51% 54%

Kentucky State

825 1827 49% 39% 44%

Fayetteville State (NC)

865 3820 55% 38% 39%

U of Ark Pine Bluff

775 2918 68% 31% 31%

Coppin State (MD)

875 2691 57% 22% 22%

Bottom Line:At Every Level of Education, What We Do Matters A Lot!

Doing More

New York

In recent years, New York has made important strides

in raising achievement, especially among low-income

students and students of color.

Between 1998 and 2005, for example, state was 3rd in reading growth among African American

4th graders and 2nd in growth among Latino 4th graders.

But serious challenges remain.

2005 NAEP Grade 4 ReadingAll Students, New York

31

36

34

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All Students

Perc

en

t o

f S

tud

en

ts

Proficient/Advanced

Basic

Below Basic


2005 NAEP Grade 4 Readingby Race/Ethnicity, New York

50 48

20

33 35

37

17 18

43

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AfricanAmerican

Latino White

Per

cent

of

Stu

dent

s

Proficient/Advanced

Basic

Below Basic


2005 NAEP Grade 8 MathAll Students, New York

30

39

31

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

All Students

Perc

en

t o

f S

tud

en

ts

Proficient/Advanced

Basic

Below Basic


2005 NAEP Grade 8 Mathby Race/Ethnicity, New York

54 49

17

3436

43

11 14

41

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AfricanAmerican

Latino White

Per

cent

of

Stu

dent

s

Proficient/Advanced

Basic

Below Basic


NY: 9th Graders Graduating 4 Years Later (2004)

Graduated

Asian 68.8%

Black 45.4%

Latino 42%

White 81%

Includes both Regents and Local Diplomas; Source, NYSED

New York vs. Top 5 States

New York Top States

HS Freshmen entering any US College

34% 52%

Community College Freshmen returning second year

61% 61%

Freshmen at 4-year colleges returning second year

81% 84%

First-time freshmen completing BA in 6 years

55% 64%

Frosh vs. Degrees,NY Statewide (2002)

Freshmen Degrees

Black 21,214 10,710

Asian 10,523 7,419

Latino 18,813 7,988

White 95,425 63,879

6 Year Graduation Rate at Largest State University:

SUNY BuffaloBlack 42%

Asian 52%

Latino 45%

Native American 50%

White 57%

Changing these patterns is not about one more program.This is about whole systems.

But remember, that’s us.

We are the ones who decide:

• Whether to move resources toward pre-k;• What to expect of whom and which

assignments to give;• Which courses to require students to take;• Whether to use our institutional aid dollars to

increase opportunity for low-income students…or to buy more students who can increase our ratings points…

Perhaps most important of all, WE

are the ones who decide who teaches whom.

And whether are courageous enough to take on this perverse status hierarchy

in our profession where status flows not from how good a teacher you are…but

from how elite the kids are that you teach.

Why Does All This Matter? What’s at Stake?

Just one example.

Nationally, there are 772 colleges where at least 5% of

the undergraduates are black.• In 299 of those, the six-year

graduation rates for black students are less than 30%;

• In 164, the six-year graduation rates for black students are less than 20%;

• In 68, the six-year graduation rates for black students are less than 10%.

In colleges where more than 5% of students are Latino…

• 25% have 6-year graduation rates for Latinos less than 30%.

Surely we can do better.

There are now about 890,000 African Americans between

25 and 34 who hold BA Degree

If we could simply cut the black-white graduation rate gap in half, the number of black college grads would grow by 10,000 per year.

Over a decade, that would produce 100,00 more African

Americans with access to opportunities currently

denied.

If we went further, and closed the gap, we could produce 200,000 more

African Americans with such access.

Similar improvement for Latino students would mean

thousands more Latino graduates IN NEW YORK

ALONE!

The Education TrustDownload this Presentation

www.edtrust.orgWashington, DC: 202-293-1217

Oakland, CA: 510-465-6444

Documents

CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP University of the State of New York Albany, NY November, 2005