Writing Question

Description

A analytical paper addressing school district learning outcomes. Referencing at least three outcome patterns from the Educational Opportunity Project report for the district you select, at least one news article from a reputable online source (doesn’t need to be a newspaper) about the district published in the last two years, at least three different Week 6-10 course readings, and at least six APA in-text citations, answer the following:

Here is the link to the Middletown, New Jersey DISTRICT that I have chosen to write about that MUST be used^^

https://edopportunity.org/explorer/#/map/none/districts/avg/ses/all/12/40.4/-74.1/3410110,40.395,-74.098

This is the link I’d like you to use for the news article from a reputable online source MUST (its information about the district)-

https://www.middletownk12.org/our-district/about-our-district

What patterns in average test scores and test scores by demographic stand out to you? Which achievement gaps between which subgroups do you notice? Make sure to detail and describe achievement trends in the district, both overall and among/between student subgroups. [Use Educational Opportunity Project report for your district]
What do our course readings tell you about these achievement trends and gaps? What do you think are the primary causes of the patterns and gaps across the district? Use course readings and one additional news article about the district to attempt to explain the patterns and gaps noted in the report for your district. Make sure to address both in-school factors contributing to achievement patterns and out-of-school factors contributing to differences in resources and opportunities. [Consider Weeks 6-9 readings]
Based on your knowledge/experience of the district and your additional news article, are these patterns and gaps surprising? Explain with specifics.
What is one policy or practice you would recommend the district consider implementing in order to address one of the gaps in achievement that you noted in your analysis? [Consider Weeks 9-10 readings]
You should write 3-4 double-spaced pages using APA format, 12-point font, and 1-inch margins. Include a Reference section. Referencing at least three outcome patterns from the Educational Opportunity Project report for the district you select, at least one news article from a reputable online source (doesn’t need to be a newspaper) about the district published in the last two years, at least three different Week 6-10 course readings, and at least six APA in-text citations, answer the following:

Unformatted Attachment Preview

25
What Discipline Is For: Connecting Students
to the Benefits of Learning
Pedro A. Noguera
the
throughout the United States. schoots tend disproportionately to punish
nal
students who have the greatest academic, social, economic, and emotio
cx—
ded,
suspen
he
likely
to
needs) Examination of which stude.nts are most
rs
membe
that
reveals
pelted. or ren oved [corn (he classroom for punishment
and
LatitrosL males.
‘if’ racial-ethnic minority groups especiallv Blacks and
of disciplinary prac
y
scrutin
Close
ted.
presen
overre
low achievers are vastly 2
ts who receive the
studen
the
of
r
tices reveals that a disproportionate numbe
ties, are from
most severe piunsliments are students who have learning disahih
for free
single—parent households, are in foster care, are homeless, or qualify
disproportion—
or i-educed—price lunch. In many schools, tliese students are
itt Iv st i ider t s of c )lor.
es in
Educators must reflect upon the facttors that give rise to such in balanc
and
duct,
school discipline. Often students’ unmet needs cause miscon
antaged students
choOls inability to address the needs of their most disadv
ors to
results in their receiving the lions share of punishment. I urge educat
needs.
ts’
studen
ds
to
ask whether discipline is meted out fairly and respon
are behind academically, who are more likely to be students
behavior, sometimes out
if color. are also more likely to engage in disruptive
from abuse or neglect
who
stiffer
en
Childr
nt,
ernharrassirie
ot frustration or 1
are also more likely to
4
peers
at home or who are harassed and teased by their
minorities in the
racial
risbehave, Since poverty rates-are higher iunong
ms
or
United States, students of color are more likely’ to exhibit behavi probie
st
hecause of unmet needs. In many schools, it is conimon for the needie
be
avior
to
misbeh
their
driving
needs
tudeTits to he disctplined and mr the
Irnored Disturbinszlv. these disparities in who gcts punished and how often
s are accepted as
cii not evoke alarm, or even concern, because these pattern
ilirmill,
Some ot this dmspropurtionate discipune may miccur because of educators
ors
racial bias, rather than students disproportionate ‘disruption.” Bitt educat
ask
to
ve
-ne unlikely to admit bias even to themselves, so it is more effecti
their actions, Teachers
‘c lucators to exaittilie tire klispr000rtionate etfects of
WHAT DISCIPLINE IS FDA
133
and atiministrators dio seek to reduce the isproportioiiate diseipitne ot
children of color can start In using data to dci lot strati’ that this (fls:lyc-ii,iu
hon exists and then probe to find out tviis it occor’.
.kn administrator at a middle school in ew I laven. Connecticut, began a
professional development activity by writing tile reasons teachers gave for
sending a student to the office on the blackboard. lie then went down the list
with the group and asked whether they kit the infractions listed were legiti
mate reasons for referring a student to the principals office for punishment.
In a public setting with their colleagues present. no one wotdd defend send
ing a student to the office for chewing gum, wearing a hat. or forgetting to
bring a pencil. Yet, these and other minor infractions were the reasons given
on the bulk of the ref errais. lie pointed out that Black and Latino boys re
ceived over So percent of these referrals; and he engaged the staff in a (hscus
of the implications of these practices.
Holding educators accountable tor racial imbalances in discipi ne need not
result in finger—pointing or recrinunanons about racist intentiojis that cannot
he proved. l-lowever. if educators are going to reduce the disproportionate
discipline meted (‘lit to poor children of color, the’ nnist accept responsihilin
for racial disparities in discipline patterns. Analvi.mg their approaches to
maintaining order can help educators to identity alternative inetlious for pm
ducing positive learning environnients. Al teniatives are essential it scl,00i’i
are to stop using discipline as a strategy for weeding out those they deem mi
desirable or difficult to teach and instead to use discipline to reconnect 501—
dents to learning.
Educators sometimes discipline students of color for tiny oflenses that do
not require discipline at all. Even when responding to more egregious acting
out, educators typically punish children of color without reflecting on the fac—
tors that may he motivating the misbehavior. Instead of asking why a student
is disrespectful to a teacher, fighting, or disturbing a classroom, many schools
react to the behavior by inflexibly’ enforcing rules in id imposing sanctions. liv
responding to conduct while ignoring the factors that cause it, schools inad
vertently further the educational failure of these students and mmiv ultimately
contribute to their inargimialization as adults.
uemjtlv punished occurs
1
The mnarginalizstiozm of students who arc I re,
cause schools rely primarily on two strategies to discipline students svito mis
behave: nunuliation and exclusion. Typically. thin respond to n’inor infractions
with humiliation. by singling out a misbehaving sti ident for rebuke amid
ostracism, or placing a student in the back of the room or the hallway. If rob—
lems persist. most schools exclude the student from the classroonv starting
with referrals to tIme principals office and gradually escdating t 1 reu1ot al fri iii
the school through suspension. or in me most urn nis cases. expuisiomi N tsr
strategies euIctivelv deny targeted students access to mstrnction and the on
portunity to learn and do little to enable students to learn from their mistakes
‘34
tod deeiop a sense of
PEDRO A. N060ERA
responihilitv for their behavior. The bict that many
ichools trequeutlv punish a small nutnuer of students 5
repeatedly suggests
hat rhs’ approaches ire ineffective in t’nauging students behavior and mak’
iizchools nore orplcriu
Discipline strategies that rely upon humiliation and exclusion are based
on
hseassiunption that Ia’ removing disnptive children from the learnin eux
g
I—
rsniitent. others will he allowed to learn in peace. While the logic behind
this
approach may seem compelling, a closer look at the consequence
of these
practices reveals obvious flaws. Students who are punished for
fairly minor
I ,chavior problems hen they aie young frequently perpetrate more
serious
offenses as they get older. The almost exclusive reliance on suspen
sion and
,thtr torms of exclusion makes little sense. especially since many
of the
students who are suspended dislike school and there is little eviden
ce that it
works as a deterrent to misconduct. In schools where suspension
rates are
high, sorting out the ‘had” students rarely results in a hetter education
for
those who remain, because many’ students are deeply alienated
from school,
have weak and even antagonistic relationships with the adults who serve
them.
10(1 believe that very few teachers care about them.°
An implicit social contract serves as the basis for maintaining
order in
schools as it does in s,xaetv, in exchange fin an education, studen
ts are ex
pected to obey the niles and ionns operative within school and to
comply
with the authority of the adults in charge. Students are expected
to relinquish
certain degree of mdividiial freedom in exchange for receiving
the benefits
For the vast majority of
elicits a
relatively high degree of compliance with school rules and
to adult authority.
Despite surveys that suggest a growing number 0
f teachers and students fear
vuilence in school, schools in the United States are actuall
y’ generally safe
5 Even though children significantly outnumber
places.
adults, they largely
conform to adult authority and, through their compliance,
make it possible
for order to he maintained.
This arrangement tends to he least effective for studen
ts who do not re
ceive the benefits promised by the social contract. Studen
ts who are behind
icadeniicallv, have not been taught by teachers who have
cultivated a love of
canting, or have come to regard school as a boring, compu
lsory chore, are
lure likely to disrupt classrooms
and dclv oirboritv. Although these students
we typically more likely to he disciplined, punishing them is
often inelfective
because it is not aimed at connecting them to learnin
g. As they come to un
derstand that the rewards of t’thication—odmission to
college and access to
weiI—payng jobs—are not available to them, students have
little incentive to
oroplv with school rides, Shulents who freoiientlv
get into trouble may have
so maox negative experiences in school that the’ conclu school
de
is not for
them and that the rewards associated with education are
beyond their reach.
.s t,idents les-elop identities cs “tnnihlemakers’ arid i leliTlqnents.’
they often
.i
if education.
WHAT OISCIPUNE IS FOR
135
internalize the label and, instead of changing their behavior, embrace the
9 Punishment reinforces undesirable behavior rather than serying as
stigma.
an effective deterrent.
ro break the cycle of failure, schools must find ways to reconnect students
who have become disaffected through prior disciplinary experiences and aca
demic failure to learning and the goals of education. Students who disrupt tile
learning environment for others must come to see the benefits of the knowl
edge and skills that education offers. In order to he motivated to comply with
school norms, they must be inspired to believe that education can serve as a
means for them to improve their lives and help their families and community.
This task necessarily involves providing these students with access to
teachers and other adult role models who can establish supportive, mentor
ing relationships with youth who have had negative experiences with the
school system. In many schools, such mentors are in short supply, both
because racial-ethnic and class differences often make it difficult for teach
ers to provide the “tough love” and moral authority that students need and
because adults are often positioned in antagonistic relationships with stu
dents. Those who learn to cross racial and class boundaries to forge strong,
productive bonds with students are able to use those relationships to moti
vate students to apply themselves and get them to see that education can
serve as a vehicle for self-improvement.’
9 Creating these ‘pes of relation
ships requires educators to take time to find out what students are person
ally interested in or concerned about so the content of the curriculum can
be made relevant to students.
While seeking to learn about and meet students’ individual needs, educators
should also respond to any more structural local factors underlying students’
acting out. A program created in Berkeley California, in 1987 demonstrates
such an approach that works. Concerned about a crack trade that relied heavily
upon local teenagers to serve as foot soldiers arid salesmen on the streets and
was contributing to discipline problems and a rising dropout rate, the city
funded a novel program aimed at preventing young people from becoming
involved in drng dealing. The Real Alternative Program CRAP) recruited middle
school students who had committed at least one criminal offense and were
regarded by their teachers and parents as at risk of greater delinquency. Stn
(lents were provided with tutors, recreational opportunities. summer emploY
ment, and a caseworker. The city funded the program by hiring an additional
officer for parking meter enforcement and earmarking the revenue to the
program. An evaluation showed that RAP was extremely successful at reducing
delinquency and improving school performance. Delinquency prevention
programs in commuruties and schools throughout tile country have proven
effective at chanuing student behavior and reducing the incidence of juvenile
delinquency Yet, even though the’ are substantially cheaper to fund than more
punitive approaches, they have not been adequately supported.
36
PEDRO A. N060ERA
in
must cases. ‘vi nit seParates rein-hers who espertence treqiieit hena fir
wino thocuv.ho no lOt is thcir 4
ttiib: keep hair students focused
on learning. Lriiess svt•.’ focus on flow to engage students, schools will continue
to he revolvioa doors for students who are bored, restless, behind academi
nih. and uncon’. tnccd that schooling will prnvtde nenents tor them and who.
II conseuence. often act in ir When we locate discipline proheinsexclu—
iveiv in students and ignore the school and local contexts in which problem—
,dic behavior occurs, we overlook thc. most important fiactors that give rise to
misbehavior. Schools that suspend large numbers nil students, or suspend
‘nail nirobers nit students frequenth. t’.picallv become so preocci ipied with
liscipline md control that tI a-s hat-c little ume to address tie conditions that
flucnce teaching and learning.
Finally, schools must focus on the values students should learn when they’
ire disciplined. In his pioneering research on moral development in children.
Lawrence Kohlherg argued that teaching students to obey rules in order to
• rvoid pumshrnent was far less effective than helping students to develop the
ability to make reasoned ethical judgments about their behavior” Bather
than punishing students by sending them home for fighting, educators
hosild teach students how to resolve conflicts peacefully: discipline should
always teach a moral lesson. Students who vandalize their building can he re—
• pared to do coani uinitv sei’ice noed at cleamng tip or improving their
school, and students who are disrespectful to teachers can he requircd to assist
that teacher on a project and to write a letter of apolos’. Over time, students
•.vril nI]Iderstanil the values that underlie the operation of the school and appre—
rate that all members are accountable to them, that the social contract holds,
Research on school discipline and safety shows that. rather than leading to a
more lenient environment that tolerates misbehavior, schools promoting an
etlucal culture can create an environment where misconduct is less likely)
2
By relying upon alternative (tiscipline strategies rooted in ethics and a
deterruinatson to reconnect sti dents to learning. schools can reduce
the like—
I ihood that the neediest and nost disengaged students, who are frequently
children of color, will be targeted for repeated punishment. Some of these rib
ternative strategies are practiced in private md public schools for affluent
-hlnjren, hut the’ are less common iii public schools that serve poor children
a’ color. There are some exceptions. Pla-Is Acoiennrv in Fort I auderdaie.
Florida, has been praised for adhering to principal Monica Lewis’s admoni—
hon to treat children with hi idness,’’ In descr thing her school, Lewis reports:
‘nW (hint have a rigid hand. We show them values. Once you give a child rn-a
SOns. non get them to tullow directions.
Producing sate and orderly schools need riot require turning schoois into
prisons or detention centers. It is issible to create schools where learning
acd academic achievement is encouraged for dl students and where nlisciplii
problems are responded to in a winner that is consIstent with the broader
—
viliziot
WHAT WSCIPLINE 5 FOR
‘27
educational goals, \e oust recognize that the children ol the poor and
children of color are no less deserving ti an the children of the affluent to h
educated in a nurturing and sIipporn V (‘llViO)T went. Ptrha s wi iat is it-edec I
even more than a shift :n dscipnnarv tactics is recruitment ut educators who
question the tent lency’ tu pi mis h t h roo ghi exc I ush m al id hu liii I iati 01 al id sec
themselves as advocates of children, not as wardens and prison guards. With
out this approacl the drive to psinisl will he difficult to reverse.
.
RESOURCES
William Avers, Rick Avers, and Bernardine Dohrn. 2001, u’uu Tolerance.’.- IIc.s-i,fing
i/u Dnt-u-fir PuRis/iuilcnt New ‘ork: i’Iw Ne-,v Press.
.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• Principle: For what sorts of behaviors are students in vow school pun
isIied Does discipline in vcur schooi otteji take the turni 01 lniii:ihatio;
or exclusion, as Noszuera sntzgests’? Does such disc-i’ lint’ disproportion—
atelv alk’ct students of color?
a. Strategy: What sorts of alternative disciplinary strategies have you
seen reconnect students to the benefits of learninc?
f a student von often (hsciplille. or sue disci
Try’ tomorrow: Think 0
plined. How nli< von and other educators at your school reconnect that student to the learning experience? . f’cdn, oifuem is a profe-nor in the- Stein/ia ri/I Scl,o 1 of Erlnca-tirni itt u’rc York Unic-ersity. His research focuses on urban school rqfdnit. eond I urns I/tat prwnote’ -student achievement, youth rioleiice, the potential impact of sc/so il rJitnec and rourliers on urban pub/k’ ehoo/s, and i-ace- and ethnic relations in A tIiC’flctO -sonutij. multicultural issues Donna Y. Ford, Ph.D. Closing the Achievement Gap: Gifted Education Must Join the Battle I In an interview, Mary M. Frasier, one of the most famous leaders in seeking equity for gifted minority and low-income students, once said: Things like poor kids and gifted programs just don’t go together [in some people’s minds]. I mean, I think that people in their heart of hearts really think that, when kids are poor, they can’t possibly perform at the level of kids that are advantaged because they haven’t had certain kinds of advantages in their home. There is such a cause-effect relationship in gifted programs that creates barriers . . . I call them my list of prerequisites to being gifted. You must have two parents, they must be college educated. You must be in the suburbs. . . . And any time you have those factors missing, then it is very difficult for people to grasp this whole issue of giftedness in other groups. (Grantham, 2002, p. 50) Throughout my career, I have focused on inequities in education, specifically gifted education, in terms of attitudes that affect and influence access, testing, and curriculum. In the same volume as Grantham, my colleagues and I argued that deficit thinking effectively hinders the representation of Black and other culturally different students in gifted education, even when they are not lowincome (Ford, Harris, Tyson, & Trotman, 2002). I argue that increasing the representation of Black and Hispanic students in gifted and AP classes will do much to close the national achievement gap (be- tween Black and Hispanic students compared to White students) and international achievement gap (between the U.S. and other nations or countries; Ford, 2006; Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008). Recently, two events and several reports have me contemplating, with renewed vigor and more ammunition (i.e., data), the achievement gap in the context of gifted education. As I write this, I await anxiously the opportunity to view Waiting for Superman, and I recently viewed MSNBC’s “Education Nation,” which both aired in September of 2010. Who and what is to blame for the achievement gap(s)? We can and do blame families. As is all too common, guest speakers and audience members who spoke on “Education Nation”—teachers, union personnel, administrators, and family members—often had someone else to blame. Ironically, I did not see students represented. They were invisible and voiceless. At any rate, we can and do blame teachers. We can and do blame administrators. We can and do blame teacher educators/colleges and universities. We can and do blame policymakers. We can and do blame students. All of us are culpable, and blaming and finger pointing has yet to solve or resolve the achievement gap problem; pointing the finger at others, ostensibly, helps to abdicate the pointer from responsibility and accountability—from sharing the blame and taking action to make change. Many motives exist among educators, policymakers, and others for closing (or not closing) the achievement gap, including federal laws and sanctions, fiscal penalties, personal agendas, professional gifted child today 31 Multicultural Issues: Closing the Achievement Gap: Gifted Education Must Join the Battle agendas,continued and much more. from pageRegardless ?? of the motive or reason, closing the achievement gap must remain a national and professional priority and commitment, and educators in the field of gifted education must enter and participate in the dialogue and effort. We must recognize our roles and responsibilities in the larger scheme of this national educational crisis, which necessitates finding ways to eliminate underrepresentation. Discussions, debates, and research about the achievement gap focus mainly on differences in academic performance (e.g., test scores, grades, graduation rates) between Black students and White students. That is, with few exceptions, reports, studies, and literature juxtapose the (poorer) performance of Black students compared to White students, with White students held as the norm or standard for which to strive. Second, discussions focus on low-income students compared to high-income students, with the latter held as the norm. Too few reports focus on the educational roadblocks affecting high achievers (for two exceptions, see Farkas & Duffett, 2008, and Lovelace, 2008). Likewise, even fewer reports focus on closing the achievement gap between gifted or high-achieving students who are minority and low income. This shortcoming is the focus of this article. My goal is to summarize a relatively recent report that has taken the road less traveled by focusing on the achievement gap among highachieving students from low-income backgrounds (Wyner, Bridgeland, & DiIulio, 2007). Although the report does not focus on minority students directly or exclusively, these students nonetheless represent an important population by default. Stated another way, half of Hispanic students and Black students are from low-income 32 winter 2011 • vol 34, no 1 environments, and thus they must be included in the studies and reports. A major premise of this article, a position that I hold strongly to, is that closing the achievement gap is not impossible, but it is also not an easy or quick fix (Ford, 2006). Commitment is essential—efforts must be deliberate, focused/targeted, and systematic. Undergirding all efforts must be concern, compassion, courage, commitment, collaboration, and the desire for change (see Table 1). standardized tests and whose family incomes are below the national median” (p. 4). However, one thing we do know is that “lower-income students, from the time they enter grade school through their postsecondary education, lose more educational ground and excel less frequently than their higher-income peers” (Wyner et al., 2007, p. 4) and unless something is done, many more of America’s brightest low-income students will meet this same education fate and be robbed of Table 1 Closing the Achievement Gap: Concern, Compassion, Courage, Commitment, Collaboration, and Change Required but Often Missing Ingredients Description Concern Educators must recognize that the achievement gap is a serious problem, and that gifted underrepresentation contributes to it. Compassion Educators must feel a sense of urgency and care deeply about the academic quality of life of Hispanic and Black students and low-income students. Courage Educators must have the courage to take on the status quo* to be advocates for what is educationally, morally, and legally right. Equity must be the basis for decisions and actions. Commitment Commitment must be more than lip service. Educators must feel a sense of co-destiny by recognizing that students, families, communities, and the nation all suffer when our students fail to reach their potential. Collaboration The achievement gap and underrepresentation cannot be closed if educators work in a vacuum; we must work with families, communities, and other organizations. Change Educators must implement changes needed to close the gap and reverse gifted underrepresentation. * On MSNBC’s “Education Nation” on September 26, 2010, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated that the status quo is not serving many students well and that educators do a disservice to students when they cater to the status quo. In their detailed report entitled “Achievement Trap,” Wyner and colleagues (2007) asserted: “very little is known about high-achieving students from lower-income families—defined as the top 25% on nationally normed educational opportunities. An important assertion of the report is that, not only are these students robbed, so too is the nation. Who are high-achieving, low-income students and how do they fare in schools? Multicultural Issues: Closing the Achievement Gap: Gifted Education Must Join the Battle • • • • • • • There continued are approximately from page ?? 3.4 million K–12 students who live below the poverty line who rank in the top quartile academically. About one million K–12 students who qualify for free or reduced lunch rank in the top quartile academically. By the first grade, only 25% of students in the top quartile academically are from lower income families. By fifth grade, only 56% of lower income students maintain their status as high achievers in reading (vs. 69% for higher income students). In high school, 25% of high-achieving lower income students fall out of the top quartile in math (vs. 16% for higher income students). High-achieving lower income students drop out of school at twice the rate of their higher income peers (8% vs. 4%). Although college entry rates are almost the same for both groups, high-achieving students from lower income families are less likely to attend the most selective colleges (19% vs. 29%) and less likely to graduate from college (59% vs. 77%). The Wyner et al. (2007) report revealed at least two findings that may be unapparent but are worth noting. First, it is evident that being a high achiever from a lower income background does not guarantee that these students will remain high achievers, nor should it be or can it be assumed that they are exempt from the challenges facing other lower income students simply because they are high achievers or highly able. As shown in Figure 1, this understudied group of students is caught in a bind in that the students experience challenges faced by high-achieving students from higher income backgrounds in their efforts to achieve educationally; at the same time, they have to contend with economic challenges, unlike the other group. Second, like their lowachieving lower income peers, they face economic hardships that hinder their social and academic opportunities. Unlike these peers, however, they are advanced learners, and efforts are not necessarily in place to sustain their levels of achievement. As Wyner et al. asserted: “The conclusion that can be drawn from our research is not that high-achieving students from lower-income backgrounds are suffering more than other lower-income students, but that their talents are similarly under-nurtured” (p. 6). I contend that high-achieving students who live in poverty are victims of academic triage, whereby educators concentrate their efforts and resources on the higher income students and the struggling students (most often low income and/or culturally different), while not addressing the needs of those who share the characteristics and needs of both (see Figure 1). This report ends with several recommendations for next steps. High Achiever Recommendations • • • • Conduct more research. Educators, researchers, and policymakers need to more fully understand why, upon entering grade school, comparatively few lower income students achieve at high levels, and what can be done in early childhood to close this achievement gap. Use data. More data need to be collected to understand this group, as well as the programs that contribute to their success, and this information should be used to replicate practices that sustain and improve high levels of performance. Go beyond proficiency tests. Education officials (federal, state, local) should consider ways to broaden the current focus on proficiency standards to include policies and incentives that expand the number of lower income students achieving at advanced levels. Expand access. Educators and policymakers must increase the number of students from this group who complete college by Low Income Figure 1. High-achieving low-income students: Caught in the middle. gifted child today 33 Multicultural Issues: Closing the Achievement Gap: Gifted Education Must Join the Battle • expanding their continued fromaccess page ??to funding, information, and entry into the full range of colleges and universities, including selective institutions of higher education. Raise expectations. Educators must raise their expectations for lower income students and implement effective strategies for maintaining and increasing advanced learning within this population. This recommendation sets the foundation for all of the other recommendations. When expectations are low, as noted by Frasier in the opening quote, efforts to make change are likely to be minimal. Expanding upon these recommendations, I also suggest that educators in gifted education focus on these three areas: • Recruitment and retention. Begin talent development programs that begin identification early (no later than first grade) and continue at least through elementary school (but preferably longer); modify assessments to ensure they are valid and reliable; examine policies and procedures to ensure that they are equitable; and examine the utility of gifted definitions, theories, and criteria. • Support and educate families. Provide information and resources to families so that they feel informed, educated, and • empowered about the achievement gap, gifted education underrepresentation, and other topics and issues deemed relevant by school personnel based on the local context. Support and educate school personnel. Ensure that all educators—teachers, counselors, administrators— receive formal, ongoing, and substantive preparation regarding the achievement gap, gifted education underrepresentation, poverty, cultural differences, and more. Summary So much more can be said about the achievement gap and gifted education underrepresentation, but space limitations are prohibitive. This brief column only skims the surface, but I hope it inspires educators, families, and policymakers to increase their attention to and efforts at understanding and meeting the needs of students who are high-ability but low-income. These students holds much promise and the nation will benefit if and when they are successful. I end this short discussion with the following cogent assertion: As we strive to close the achievement gap between racial and economic groups, we will not succeed if our highest-performing students from lower-income Regardless of the motive or reason, closing the achievement gap must remain a national and professional priority and commitment, and educators in the field of gifted education must enter and participate in the dialogue and effort. 34 winter 2011 • vol 34, no 1 families continue to slip through the cracks. Our failure to help them fulfill their demonstrated potential has significant implications for the social mobility of America’s lower-income families and the strength of our economy and society as a whole. (Wyner et al., 2007, p. 7). GCT References Farkas, S., & Duffett, A. (2008). Highachieving students in the era of NCLB: Results from a national teacher survey (Part 2). Washington, DC: Thomas E. Fordham Institute. Ford, D. Y. (2006). Closing the achievement gap: How gifted education can help. Gifted Child Today, 29(4), 14–18. Ford, D. Y., Grantham, T. C., & Whiting, G. W. (2008). Another look at the achievement gap: Learning from the experiences of gifted Black students. Urban Education, 43, 216–239. Ford, D. Y., Harris, J. J., III., Tyson, C. A., & Trotman, M. F. (2002). Beyond deficit thinking: Providing access for gifted African-American students. Roeper Review, 24, 52–62. Grantham, T. C. (2002). Underrepresentation in gifted education: How did we get here and what needs to change? Roeper Review, 24, 50–51. Lovelace, T. (2008). High-achieving students in the era of NCLB: Analysis of NAEP data (Part 1). Washington, DC: Thomas E. Fordham Institute. Wyner, J. S., Bridgeland, J. M., & DiIulio, J. J., Jr. (2007). Achievement trap: How America is failing millions of highachieving students from lower-income families. Lansdowne, VA: Jack Cooke Kent Foundation. https://www.middletownk12.org/our-district/about-our-district https://edopportunity.org/explorer/#/map/none/districts/avg/ses/all/12/40.4/-74.1/3410110,40.395,-74. 098 Pu