Commentaries: Racial Differences in Test Preparation Strategies: A commentary on Shadow Education, American Style: Test Preparation, the SAT and College Enrollment

Abstract

Claudia Buchmann, Dennis Condron and Vincent Roscigno s study, titled Shadow Education, American Style: Test Preparation, the SAT and College Enrollment, demonstrates that vigorous use of expensive test preparation tools, such as private classes and tutors, significantly boosts scores on standardized exams such as the SAT or ACT. This preparation, in turn, promotes access to more selective institutions. Because access to preparation varies according to social class, it turned out to be a key lever in the social transmission of privilege. One of the noteworthy findings in the BCR study is the racial and ethnic differences in the use of test preparation: blacks and Hispanics are more likely than whites from comparable backgrounds to utilize test preparation. The black-white gap is especially pronounced in the use of high school courses, private courses and private tutors. The Hispanic-white gap is more modest, and is limited to the use of private tutors. The black-white gap in test prep is surprising given blacks' lower levels of social and financial capital and the well-documented test score gap. In 2006, for example, the black-white test score gap was about 200 points, a decline from a gap of 250 points three decades ago (The College Board 2006). Consequently, in this comment, I wish to delve into the black-white variation in test preparation strategies in order to better understand its patterns and consider its relation to the edge black applicants receive in admissions at selective colleges and universities with affirmative action policies. My main objective is to outline a theoretical framework that will shed light on the racial and ethnic disparity in test preparation. In the interest of parsimony, I focus here on the pronounced black-white differences, yet the data indicates that the patterns for Hispanics and Asians are similar to those for blacks and whites, respectively, which strengthens the generalizability and relevance of the proposed framework. The analytical strategy I use conforms to the BCR study in terms of the dataset, multiple imputation, analytical weight and sample.1 Like BCR I use an indicator of highest-level test preparation but also constructed a variable that counts multiple test preparation activities. Unlike BCR, a distinction is made between private (private courses and tutors) and public (books, videos, software and high school courses) types of test preparation. This distinction is theoretically important because private preparation is not only more effective in raising