0.7 Gallegos, c., & Wise, d. (september 2011). leadership for  (Page 4/18)

The achievement gap

The achievement gap has been the subject of discussion for many years. Possible explanations for the gap have been offered that range from poverty to lack of teacher expectations. Some assume that a gap in achievement is inevitable, while others claim that the achievement gap exists because of an educational system that is not set up to meet the needs of the children that walk through its doors (Johnson, 2002). According to the National Governor’s Association, the achievement gap is related to both race and class and “is one of the most pressing education-policy challenges that states currently face” (National Governor’s Association, n.d.).

The achievement gap is often blamed on poverty and the parents—factors outside the control of the schools (Danielson, 2002; Wallerstein&Bernstein, 1999). These reasons were also cited in the Coleman Report (1966); however, more recent research has shown that race, poverty and other parental factors are only a part of the problem. Borman found that educational experiences, including the socio-economic and ethnic make-up of the school attended, account for up to 40% of the variance in achievement (Viadero, 2006). Children living in poverty may enter school with less vocabulary, fewer life experiences, and less exposure to print resources. This is particularly true of English learners who may enter school with no English, a lack of understanding of the mainstream culture, often live in poverty, and have parents who have a culturally different expectation of their role in their child’s education. This can result in schools having lower expectations for these students, cultural bias, and school alienation of students and parents (Lindsey, Roberts,&CambellJones, 2005).

Since the passage of California Proposition 227, which mandated English only instruction in 1998, children who enter school not speaking English must sink or swim, because support for their primary language may not be available or even permissible. As a result, while their English-speaking peers begin learning the required content standards right from day one of instruction, English learners may become submersed in a sea of foreign experiences in a language that they do not yet speak or understand. English learners begin to learn on day one as well, but their learning is about navigating a foreign place and a foreign language, not yet about the content standards required by the state.

The result is that many of these ELs make less than a full year’s growth related to the content standards required for the academic year. If English learners enter school in kindergarten, they may quickly pick up enough English to benefit from much of the instruction related to the content standards. However, the older an English learner is upon school entry, the more difficult it can be to learn both the English language and the content of the standards quickly enough. Research shows that when students struggle to make progress year after year, they fall further and further behind (Clark, 2009; Short&Echevarría, 2004/2005; Thomas&Collier, 2002). Year after year of school failure results in high drop out rates over time (Murphy, 2010).