How much effect can by themselves have on the persistent and corrosive learning gap between rich and poor? Not much, according to Diane Ravitch, whose writings I often admire. She recently told an audience of educators that the problem is poverty, not our schools (Carey, 2011, p. 14). A recent Kappan column echoes the sentiment: America does not have a general education crisis; we have a poverty crisis (Rebell & Wolff, 2012). Such remarks promote a dangerous complacency among those who believe that, on balance, our are doing well enough. These people insist that poverty, not schooling, should be our focus. Demography is destiny. Without doubt, poverty affects educational attainment. It is important then to fight for social justice, for programs we know will mitigate the effects of poverty. But must we buy into the notion that improvements to schooling can only have a marginal effect on the achievement gap? Absolutely not. The potential effect of better schooling becomes apparent the moment we take an unblinking look at how students actually spend time in school. Richard Rothstein is a compelling expositor of the notion that only societal changes can narrow the achievement gap. In a debate with Kati Haycock, president of the Education Trust, he argues that the purported gains on state tests aren't the result of better schooling but the result of test preparation and artful, state-level manipulation of cut scores and test item difficulty. As encouraging as these gains may look on paper, they don't truly reflect an increase in college readiness among low-income students, he said (Holland, 2007). Haycock does not deny this. But she cites numerous schools, districts, and whole states where improvements in teaching led to a significant reduction in the achievement gap, even according to NAEP scores, a more reliable measure of college readiness than state tests. As their exchange heats up, Rothstein makes small concessions, but then doubles down on his central argument: Improvements to schooling haven't had much effect on the real achievement gap--the one between those who are and aren't ready for college or post-secondary studies (Holland, 2007). Indeed, test score gains are not always a reliable indicator of substantial intellectual growth--of a kind that truly prepares students to succeed in college or other post-secondary studies. Schools affect learning When the dust settles, I'm convinced that there is indisputable evidence that improvements in schooling have a significant effect on student learning. But this would be even more true, not less, if we began to focus on precisely what Rothstein correctly defines as the real achievement challenge: truly equipping a larger proportion of students to succeed in college. When it comes to college readiness, Rothstein's pessimism overlooks a revealing feature of modern schooling: disastrous literacy practices. Our deep denial about this bears directly on our tepid estimations of how much effect can have on low-income populations. Fundamental changes to literacy practices will dramatically reduce the college-readiness gap, and in short order. Let's start with reading. Nothing is more important to college success than the ability to read well. But throughout K-12 schooling, the amount and complexity of students are required to do in a six-period school day is a scandal. When I ask my audiences, What are the two things you are least apt to catch students doing during the school day? Their immediate, almost choral response is reading and writing, followed by muffled laughter. Startling as it sounds, wrote Lucy Calkins and her colleagues, Students read for a remarkably small percentage of the day. It is not unusual, they found, for students to read for no more than 10 minutes during a 2 1/2 hour block (Calkins, Montgomery, & Santman, 1998, pp. …
Read full abstract