Kati Haycock has a great deal to say about the gaps in achievement among American students—and much of the news is a bitter pill to swallow. According to Haycock, director of The Education Trust, the achievement gap between affluent white students and poor/minority students narrowed significantly during the 1970s and 1980s. That was the good news. The bad news is that the progress halted in the late 1980s and the gap has, in fact, widened again during the last decade.

Haycock laid out these facts as part of her presentation to the Education Leadership Conference (ELC) on May 13 in Danvers , Mass. The ELC is an annual event hosted by Measured Progress to bring together administrators from districts throughout New England to share information crucial to improving student learning. (Watch for information about next year's conference.)

As Haycock demonstrated, the proof that the achievement gap is widening is in the data. United States Department of Education (USDOE) statistics show that the performance gap between African American/Latino students and white students on the reading portion of the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) grew from 21 points in 1988 to 31 points in 1999. USDOE figures for 1999 also indicate that African American and Latino 17-year-olds read at the same levels as 13-year-old white students.

Similar gaps are evident when the numbers are broken down by household income. In 2003, 41 percent of fourth graders classified as “not poor” scored in the “proficient/advanced” level on the NAEP reading assessment. Conversely, of the students classified as “poor,” only 15 percent attained the level of “proficient/advanced” on the same assessment.

According to Haycock, there was a similar gap on math performance. Thirty-seven percent of “not poor” eighth-graders performed at the “proficient/advanced” level on the 2003 NAEP math assessment, as compared to 11 percent of “poor” students. And, consistent with reading performance, African American and Latino 17-year-olds did math at the same level as white 13-year-olds.

Haycock acknowledged that narrowing achievement gaps is a challenge, one exacerbated by wrongheaded stereotypes about the learning potential of poor and minority students. The tendency to lay the blame for poor achievement on uncaring parents, one-parent households, poverty, inadequate nutrition, too few books, and so on, can lead policy makers and educators to throw in the towel when it comes to poor and minority achievement.

They shouldn’t. Paradoxically, poor and minority students in some schools are beating the odds and performing extremely well, according to Haycock. Many schools across the nation with significant poor and minority populations have proven that their students could be high performers and on a par with their white, more affluent peers.

West Manor Elementary School in Georgia is a case in point. With a student population that is 99 percent African American and 80 percent poor, 90 percent of West Manor’s fourth graders met or exceeded the state standard for reading in 2002. In fact, West Manor’s second graders outscored students in 98 percent of Georgia elementary schools in reading and 90 percent of the schools in math in 2002. The question is, “why?”

“Demographics aren’t destiny,” said Haycock. “Underachievement is not forever inscribed in the DNA of certain kids.” In fact, students often have a better sense of obstacles to performance than do the so-called experts. While some students do blame themselves for poor performance, many cite inadequate teacher mastery of subject matter, counselors and administrators who underestimate student potential, and “wretchedly, boringly low expectations” as obstacles to achievement.

The experience of successful schools bears out the latter; time and again students have responded positively to more rigorous curricular expectations. “The biggest predictor of college success is the rigor of the high school curriculum,” said Haycock. But what other factors contribute to narrowing the achievement gap?

First and foremost, Haycock stressed the importance of abandoning preconceived notions tying student performance potential to socioeconomic markers. Increased support of quality pre-kindergarten programs and districts serving concentrations of poor children are also top priorities.

Other keys to improved student performance include instructional systems with collaborative decision making concerning students and curriculum, frequent classroom assessment to gauge student progress, immediate action to remedy identified problem areas, and shared responsibility on the part of all stakeholders.

Of particular importance, according to Haycock, is the need for a more equitable distribution of teachers in terms of subject area knowledge and experience level. She cited a Texas study that determined that five years in a row of above-average teachers can close the achievement gap among poor and minority students. It is also essential to help all teachers improve their knowledge and skills through intensive and focused professional development, Haycock said.

So the challenges might be great, but not insurmountable. “If you get people pulling in the same direction, you will see what American education can do at its best,” Haycock said.