Discussion

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION 58

Multicultural Reviews

Ethnic Identity and Its Relationship with School Achievement

Multicultural Reviews

Rosa Hernández Sheets

The achievement gap disparity in school performance associated with eth- nicity shows up in high school graduation rates, test scores, grades, drop-out rates, and college completion. It is one of the most urgent problems in public schooling. Researchers can use ethnicity to predict the schooling outcomes of millions of children by the end of their kindergarten year. According to Johnson and Viadero, by 2019, at age 24, European American children entering kindergarten in Fall 2000, “will be twice as likely as their African American classmates, and three times as likely as Hispanics, to have a college degree” (p. 1). Some scholars who examine explana- tions for the achievement gap identify factors such as fl aws within the tests them- selves, characteristics inherent in low- performing students and their families, and inadequacies of classroom teachers (Orfi eld & Kornhaber, 2001; Madaus & Clark, 2001). They point out that the fl aws within the tests themselves challenge their validity. Tests are unfair, culturally biased, do not test what is being taught/learned in school, and are not aligned with state and school standards or with textbook content. Other explanations focus on blaming students and their families. Individuals holding this viewpoint argue that low-per- forming students are: poor, unmotivated, unskilled, have parents that do not care, do not have books in the home, come from single-parent households, are linguistically defi cient, and watch too much television (Sheets, 2005). These critics believe that students may dismiss the rewards or punishments attached to tests and may put forth minimal effort. They argue that low-performing students are not motivated to take the test. Cultural variations in par- enting, differences in cultural values and practices, and diverse linguistic skills are viewed as defi cit factors affecting school achievement.

The responsibility is also placed on teachers (Goodwin, 2002). Individuals who blame teachers maintain that the cultural mismatch between teachers and students creates incompatible learning conditions. Teachers may not have strong academic backgrounds in the subjects they teach and may not know how to teach their as- signed subjects or grade level. Teachers in low-performing schools are more likely to be uncredentialed, have low expectations for their students, teach less because they spend most of their time handling disciplin- ary issues, rarely teach reasoning skills, do not offer students a rigorous curricula, and are often absent from the classroom.

The Review

In Dismantling Educational Inequal- ity: A Cultural-Historical Approach to Clos- ing the Achievement Gap, Pedro R. Portes (2005), an educational psychologist and Fulbright scholar, critically examines why and how the achievement gap persists. He takes a different approach to discuss why conditions, in and out of school, encour- age and perpetuate what he calls Group Based Inequality (GBI) (Portes, 1996). This review summarizes the content of the text and concludes with a discussion.

Dismantling Educational Inequality: A Critical-Historical Approach to Closing the Achievement Gap By Pedro R. Portes New York: Peter Lang, 2005 www.peterlangusa.com ISBN 0-8204-7606-4 paperback, 306 pgs., $34.95

Portes organizes the text in three sec- tions: Part I—Defi ning the Problem; Part II—A Cultural Approach to a Historical Problem; and Part III—Transforming the Education of Educators and Policy Makers. Each part is summarized.

Part I: Defi ning the Problem This section opens with the power- ful, dissenting opinion from Justice Felix Frankfurter in Dennis v. United States, 339 US 184 in 1949 — “there is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals” (p. 3). This statement can be applied to the issues facing most students who differ ethnically and economically from European American mainstream students. While academic prospects may be present in K-12 schools, Portes explains why access to these opportunities may be problematic, or in some cases impossible. In the fi rst segment, Portes points out that schooling, as a culturing prac- tice, is designed to benefi t mainstream, middle-class students. As a result, those who do not fi t this model may be system- atically disadvantaged. Many students placed at risk (SPARs) in schools can be identifi ed through individual and group membership—in particular, ethnic, minor- ity groups. They do not receive equitable access to available instruction. The result is a predictive achievement gap or Group- Based Inequality that “occurs when the same teaching has different consequences on students because of their prior knowl- edge, development, cultural context, status, and power relative to others” (p. 43). Portes (2005) argues that the cultur- ally incompatible schooling conditions experienced by children from historically, established minority, ethnic groups often results in damage to their identity devel- opment. According to Portes, the question becomes, do we really want to eradicate the achievement gap? If yes, how can we build equitable schooling environments that support positive identity development and insure achievement outcomes? How do we correct teacher preparation programs that can adequately prepare the majority of teachers from one culture to teach the children who come from another culture. A cultural developmental approach is

SUMMER 2006 59

Multicultural Reviews needed—children’s cultural competencies must be linked to the teaching-learning process. Teachers must acquire this knowl- edge base and understand how to apply this culturally inclusive learning process in the classroom. “To reduce the gap, school learn- ing needs to depend less on SES mediated parental support” (p. 77).

Part II: A Cultural Approach to a Historical Problem According to Portes, “the achievement gap has been historically determined by vir- tue of compounding poverty, lesser educa- tional opportunities, and expectations with ethnicity—and in many cases, long periods of oppression” (p. 98). Children who match the culture and class of the dominant group generally succeed, those that do not usually fail, and this lack of success exacerbates over time. Unfortunately, culture-class, dependent schools create and reproduce student and teacher failure. To reverse the trend of failure for students who differ from the mainstream ethnically and economically, Portes proposes a multiple-focused curriculum that includes human development and life-skills that prepares adolescents for careers and future parenthood. He maintains equipping adoles- cents with knowledge and skills to handle life’s issues improves not only their own life style but that of future generations. This approach requires reforming current policies and procedures and implementing critical changes in the way we prepare teachers. Since “risk behaviors are often fueled by risk conditions” (p. 122), Portes theorizes that a comprehensive life-skills curriculum, rich with critical thinking skills, especially at the secondary level, can prepare adoles- cents to better parent their children which may promote greater parental involvement in the schooling of those children. He envi- sions a spiral curricular approach with hu- man growth and development as a specifi c, curricular component. He theorizes that young SPARs would view this component of the curriculum as relevant and applicable to solving problems in their immediate life. This strategy, preventive rather than reactive in nature, might improve the massive inequality present in the current, public school experiences of SPARs. It also has the potential of minimizing parental social class differences in school involvement. A second component, in Portes’ vision to help “offset the massive, disadvantages children from poor underrepresented groups face” (p. 166) and to eliminate the

achievement gap for SPARs, is preschool programs. First, access to effective, high quality preschool opportunities which fo- cus on the socio-cognitive development of young poor children, with parental involve- ment, must be extended to all SPARs, not just to a selected few. This component is critical because most SPAR preschoolers attend substan- dard, lower quality public schools located in poor neighborhoods and staffed with less qualifi ed teachers. These phenomena reinforce inequalities in schooling condi- tions at the onset of their school life. These negative schooling experiences set the stage for damaged identities to develop. Thus, for the most part, SPARs face consistent, systematic inequitable, unethical schooling deprivations from “start to fi nish” (p. 155). To prevent the one- to-three-year achievement gaps that materialize early in the elementary grades, Portes’s plan includes an elementary component. He believes that an effective elementary school component must include improved teaching-learning conditions in the classroom and increased after-school resources to the child, family, and community. These activities must in- volve children in after-school mentoring and academic clubs. Portes also argues that a change in the culturing process of schooling demands that the actions of school personnel be evaluated and addressed.

Part III: Transforming the Education of Educators and Policy Makers According to Portes, a transformation in the existing programs in higher educa- tion that prepare teachers, administrators, counselors, and policymakers must take place. For example, he advocates a cultural- historical approach to the preparation of educators. This method promotes (a) knowl- edge of the societal, political, and academic factors, in and out of school, infl uencing achievement gaps to emerge and fl ourish in schools; and, (b) knowledge of human devel- opment theory and research and life skills; and, the ability to apply this information in a culturally inclusive teaching-learning process responsive to SPARs. Portes, believing that “substantial changes” must be made in the ways schools are designed and organized, concludes with policy recommendations. One of his sug- gestions focuses on the ways institutions of higher education prepare teachers, ad- ministrators, counselors, and other school personnel. He argues that we must identify a common knowledge base and strategic plan that is shared in the academy. Finally,

he cautions that “more of the same” will not be enough, if we are serious about improv- ing schooling conditions for those who are most underserved.

Discussion

Clearly, understanding the role of ethnicity in the human developmental process may be key to conceptualizing ways to improve the teaching-learning process in ways that minimize or eliminate the growing achievement gap among diverse groups of children. Understandings of ethnic identity formation and development (of self and others) and its relationship to achievement outcomes may be central to changing classroom and school practices. In Dismantling Educational Inequity: A Cultural-Historical Approach to Closing the Achievement Gap, Portes provides a multi-level, policy-orientated framework that explicitly acknowledges students’ socialization process, in and out of school, to understand how identity development, which includes ethnicity as a critical vari- able, impacts achievement outcomes. This text presents a clear, contex- tual, operational defi nition of the construct achievement gap. Portes advances under- standings of the factors, in and out of school, that contribute to the lack of academic success by many children, especially eco- nomically poor children with membership in ethnic minority groups. This is a major contribution to the scholarship because this foundation can help educators frame the issues facing children who are the least advantaged Portes discusses some of the limita- tions inherent in the ways educators have attempted to address the achievement gap. For example, specifi c programs such as Upward Bound, AVID, and Gear Up, have focused on a select few. Also, preventive actions, such as Head Start, created to improve early learning of SPARs, service only a small number of eligible children; and these programs, as currently designed, have negligible long-term results. Portes maintains that these efforts, while benefi cial to some children, seem to center on “raising performance rather than reducing the achievement gap” (p. 73). Ac- cording to Portes, we must acknowledge and address the challenge of creating, implementing, and sustaining schooling conditions that serve the needs of the mas- sive numbers of SPARs who are currently marginalized and underserved in schools. Additionally, Portes points out that serious problems in the schooling process,

MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION 60

Multicultural Reviews such as tracking, and the possible elimina- tion of these practices, may not necessarily result in improved learning conditions for the most affected students. While he concedes that current tracking practices in schools create learning conditions for SPARs that place them at risk for learn- ing, merely untracking may not be a viable solution. He argues that “the system needs to be untracked, rather than the students.” That is, we need culturally-historically framed changes in (a) the ways we prepare teach- ers, counselors, and administrators, (b) the curricular content, and (c) the instructional process and context in classrooms. This book provides a conceptual framework, grounded in the cultural-his- torical infl uences in human developmental process, for understanding the achieve- ment gap. While pointing out flaws in the educational system and describing the inequitable out of school conditions experienced by children who live in pov- erty, Portes also identifi es and describes possible solutions for improving schooling opportunities. He reminds us that achieve- ment outcomes and equitable conditions in schooling must not be based on skin color, ethnic background, or on the economic sta- tus of one’s parents. This groundbreaking

book, grounded in scholarship, is written in a straight-forward and engaging format. It is a ‘must read’ and ‘must have’ book in the minds and libraries of educators seriously concerned with reducing and eventually eliminating the achievement gap.

References Goodwin, L. (2002). Low teacher expectation

for children of color. Journal of Thought, 37(4), 83-104.

Johnson, R. C., & Viadero, D. (2000). Unmet promise: Raising minority achievement. Education Week, 1-10. Retrieved from http:/ www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory. cfm?slug=27 pagintro.h10

Madaus, G., & Clarke, M. (2001). The adverse impact of high-stakes testing on minority students: Evidence from one hundred years of test data. In G. Orfi eld & M. Kornhaber (Eds.), Raising standards or barriers? In- equality and high stakes testing in public education (pp. 85-106). New York: Century Foundation.

Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. (Eds.). (2001). Raising standards or barriers? Inequality and high stakes testing in public education. New York: Century Foundation.

Portes, P. R. (1996). Ethnicity and culture in educational psychology. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), The handbook of educational psychology (pp. 331-357). New York: Simon,

Schuster, Macmillan. Portes, P. R. (2005). Dismantling Educational

Inequality: A Critical-Historical Approach to Closing the Achievement Gap. New York: Peter Lang.

Sheets, R. H. (2005). Diversity pedagogy: Exam- ining the role of culture in the teaching-learn- ing process. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

—Rose Hernandez Sheets is an associate professor

with Department of Curriculum and Instruction in the College of Education

at Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.