Racial promotion through racial exclusion

RACIAL PROMOTION THROUGH RACIAL EXCLUSION

Curtis Crawford

acial disparities in academic achievement are

unacceptable: they must be eliminated with all

possible speed. So declares theTask Force convened

by the College Board, in a special report entitled "Reaching the Top."

The Task Force, though mostly professorial, in- cludes the president of the National Academy of Sciences, the chair of Harvard's Department of Afro- American Studies, a former director of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, the provost of Howard University, the superintendent of the Bos-

ton Public Schools and the chief executive officer

of the Exxon Corporation. It deliberated for more than two years before announcing its conclusions.

The report's language is emphatic and insistent:

"[T]he most important educational challenge for the

United States ... is eliminating, once and for all, the stir large educational achievement gaps among the nation's racial and ethnic groups." This is a "moral and pragmatic imperative," which must be accom- plished "as quickly as possible" (pp. 1-2).

Race-based affirmative action has often been ac- cused of papering over substantial group differences in academic performance, in order to increase mi-

nority participation. The report, with an approach that it calls Affirmative Development, bluntly faces

the existence of these gaps and proposes to elimi-

nate them. Racial preference, especially when carried out by

public institutions, has increasingly seemed in legal jeopardy from court decisions and ballot initiatives.

But the degree of preference in current programs is quite modest compared to what is contemplated

by the report. Its goals are racially defined and its means are racially discriminatory on a massive scale.

As long as it takes to close the gaps in academic

achievement, tens of thousands of educational pro-

grams, for tens of millions of students, would be

provided exclusively for black, Latino and Native

Americans: no whites or Asians need apply.

The arguments in favor of race-based affirmative

action have long centered on the condition of black Americans, building on a widespread feeling that special help is justified to counteract a long history

of adverse discrimination. But the report 's case for Affirmative Development adds and emphasizes Latinos, soon to be our largest minority, whose historical roots are largely outside the United States. The authors consider equal achievement for Latinos

just as important as equal achievement for blacks;

this forces a change in the fundamental reason for special assistance. Racial gaps in academic performance are viewed as unacceptable per se, whether

due to discrimination or not, whether the historical lack of educational opportuni ty associated with them occurred in this country or elsewhere.

The report advocates an immense national effort at every educational level. It is packed with recommendations for leaders of colleges and universities; donors and research scholars; federal, state and local educational leaders and policymakers; national and local organizations concerned with education; minority leaders and parents; private foundations; agencies of the federal government; business leaders, corporations and the news media.

The primary focus is on racial and ethnic inequality at the higher levels of student performance. Suc- cess is to be measured by the relative level of academic skills and knowledge attained, not by the

number of years in school or of degrees. How large are the present gaps, and why are they unaccept-

able? The size of the gaps is documented unflinchingly

by the report. It cites the results of recent tests in

reading and mathematics, conducted by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. In these tests,

RACIAL PROMOTION THROUGH RACIAL EXCLUSION 37

given to fourth, e igh th and twelf th graders nat ion-

wide , p e r f o r m a n c e is classif ied as Advanced, Profi-

cient , Basic or Be low Basic. My first table shows the

pe rcen tage of twelf th-graders f rom each racial g roup

w h o s c o r e d w i t h i n the A d v a n c e d and Prof ic ien t

ranges for the reading tes t o f 1998 and the ma th

test of 1996.

Racial/ethnic % scoring ADVANCED % scoring PROFICIENT

group in in

Reading Math Reading Math

White 7 2 47 20

Asian 6 7 38 33

Amer. Indian 3 0 27 3

Hispanic 2 0 26 6

Black 1 0 18 4

At the Advanced reading level, whi tes andAsians

w e r e ahead of Hispanics and blacks b y more than

th ree to one; at the Advanced level in math, Asians

w e r e the same d is tance ahead of whi tes . In Profi-

c ien t reading, wh i t e s led, bu t the gaps were smaller;

at the Prof ic ient level in math ,Asians d id much bet-

te r than whi tes , w h o in t u rn o u t p a c e d the o t h e r

g roups b y w ide margins. Similar pa t t e rns a p p e a r e d

in the tests of four th and e igh th graders . [My fig-

ures, f rom the NAEP webs i te , differ s o m e w h a t f rom

those in the r e p o r t (p. 7).]

The gaps ind ica ted by high-school grades and SAT

sco re s a re no t m u c h d i f ferent . The s e c o n d tab le

shows the pe rcen tage of 1997 col lege-bound seniors

w i t h h igh-school GPAs o f A t h r o u g h A+ and SAT

verba l or ma th scores above 600.

% with GPA ofA -A+ % with SAT of 600+

Verbal Math

Racial/ethnic

group

White 23 25 27 Asian 28 22 41

Amer. Indian 14 12 12

Hispanic 16 10 10

Black 9 7 4

Asians led in grades and ma th scores, espec ia l ly

in the latter. Native and Hispanic Amer icans occu-

p i e d a l o w midrange and blacks w e r e far ther be-

h ind on all t h ree measures . [For its GPA compar i -

sons, the r e p o r t (p. 8) odd ly rever ts to ETS figures

for 1992 and then miss ta tes them.]

At k inde rga r t en age, substant ial gaps are a l ready

presen t . Re leased too late for inc lus ion in the re-

p o r t are the first f indings o f the Early Ch i ldhood

Longi tudinal Study, w h i c h in 1998 surveyed 22,000

ch i ldren a t tending k inde rga r t en in 1,000 pub l ic and

pr iva te schools . The third table shows the percen t -

age o f k i n d e r g a r t n e r s in each rac ia l g r o u p w h o

scored in the t op quar t i le in tests of reading and

ma th skills.

Racial/ethnic % scoring in the top quartile

group Reading Math

Asian 39 38

White 30 32

Hispanic 15 14

Black 15 10

Amer. Indian 9 9

One could ci te a hos t of addi t ional statistics, all

s how ing substant ia l racial inequal i ty in academic

pe r fo rmance . The ex is tence of the fact is clear. But

w h e t h e r the fact is unacceptable--whether it mus t

be e rad ica ted if at all p o s s i b l e - - i s not so clear.

Are G a p s U n a c c e p t a b l e ?

In h u m a n life there has always b e e n inequal i ty

of individual achievement . Despi te the social p rob-

lems it somet imes creates, w e general ly accep t this

k ind of inequality, unless it arises f rom the viola t ion

of o the rs ' r ights. We cons ide r inequal i ty of achieve-

men t a natural resul t w h e n individuals wi th differ-

en t desires, abil i t ies and c i rcumstances are free to

pu r sue the good as they see i t .And w e fear the de-

gree of social control , i n d e e d subjugat ion , w h i c h

w o u l d ensh roud a socie ty d e t e r m i n e d to make ev-

e ry p e r s o n equal in achievement .

Presumably the Task Force has no ob jec t ion to

inequal i ty of ach ievemen t for individuals. It w o u l d

favor progress for every s tudent , bu t it w o u l d no t

d e m a n d or e x p e c t equal individual results.Why, then,

does it d e m a n d equal racial group results?

Such a d e m a n d is no t en t i re ly new. Many civil

r ights activists have e m b r a c e d the no t i on that ra-

cial just ice impl ies racial equal i ty in earnings and

inf luence .The r ight to such equal i ty belongs, as t hey

see it, to racial groups wi th r e spe c t to o t h e r groups ,

t hough no t to m e m b e r s of a g roup w i th r e spec t to

each other .This c laim is somet imes exp re s sed as a

d e m a n d for p ropor t iona l i ty : that each g roup is en-

t i t led to share in par t ic ipa t ion , c o m p e n s a t i o n and

l eadersh ip in p r o p o r t i o n to its share o f the popula-

tion. Race-based se lec t ion in educa t ion and employ-

m e n t favor ing " u n d e r r e p r e s e n t e d " rac ia l g roups ,

w h e n t hey are less qualified, has heen de fended as

a means of raising t h e m toward p r o p o r t i o n a l equal-

ity. The Task Force takes this ou t look a s tep further.

It adds a r ight to racial equal i ty in academic achieve-

ment , w h i c h if secured w o u l d foster racial equal i ty

in earn ings and inf luence . Its first l ine of a rgumen t

is set forth in a ser ies of p ropos i t i ons at the begin-

38 SOCIETY �9 JULY/AUGUST 2000

ning of the report (pp. 1-2). After noting the existence of large racial performance gaps throughout students' school careers, the report adds the follow- ing points.

1. Racial inequalities in academic achievement contribute to racial inequalities in occupa-

t ional opportunities and achievements.

2_ Black, Latino and Native Americans now are

nearly one-third and by 2030 will be over two- fifths of the U.S. population under age 18.

3. Racial differences in academic achievement can become a progressively larger source of social conflict.

4~ Without great Black, Latino and Native Ameri- can academic progress, the institutions of our society and their leadership cannot be fully integrated.

5. Nor can we draw on the full range of talents in our population.

6 Therefore, the elimination of racial inequalities in academic achievement is a moral and

pragmatic imperative.

I suspect that only those already committed to the conclusion find this argument compelling.A few comments in rebuttal will indicate the weakness of the premises.

Proposition (1) is true for racial inequalities, but also for religious, sex, class, regional or other group inequalities, yet we do not judge these unacceptable.

Proposition (2) is plausible, given current immi-

gration trends. It would not come true if immigra- tion policy were changed to favor applicants who

are college or even high-school graduates. Proposition (3) is off target, if the social conflict

it hypothesizes is severe. Racial inequalities in achievement do not produce dangerous social conflict unless they are caused by, or result in, discrimi-

nat ion based on group membership. Proposition (4) is clearly false, if"fully integrated"

simply means that participation in an institution is not based on race. It would be true only if "fully integrated" were defined as proportional represen- tation by race.

Proposition (5) is just as true for whites andAsians

whose talents remain undeveloped, as for blacks, Latinos and Native Americans whose talents remain

undeveloped. Thus, Proposition (6) is unproved.The only solid

link in this chain of reasoning is the connection between unequal academic and unequal occupa-

tional achievement. But the fact that A contributes

to B cannot make A unacceptable unless B is unacceptable. The report does not try to show that B (racial inequality in occupational achievement) is unacceptable.

Authority of the N e w Commandment The Task Force professes to see an overriding

commandment to end racial disparities in academic

achievement. If not in its reasoning, what is the

source of this mandate? Surely not the Hebrew or Christian scriptures, where it is neither stated nor implied. From the doctrines that we are all created

in God's image and equally subject to original sin, it does not follow that individuals or racial groups must

be equal in righteousness, wisdom, worldly goods or spiritual salvation.The Task Force will not assert that their commandment, though missing from the Bible, is revealed in the Koran or in some other au- thoritative religious source.

The Declaration of Independence proclaims the

equal right of individuals (not groups) to pursue

happiness (but not to gain i t . )The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution grants persons (not

groups) the right to equal protection (but not to equal achievement).

American state and federal civil rights statutes grant persons the right not to be racially discrimi- nated against in access to employment, housing, public accommodations and other social goods. These measures require a crucial form of racial equality: that one not be favored or disfavored based on one's race. But racial equality in the very differ-

ent sense of equal group success in acquiring social goods was not the aim of anti-discrimination

legislation. Indeed, the pursuit of racial equality in achievement, via the programs recommended in the

report, would require massive and sustained viola- tion of the rule against racial discrimination.

Should the racial equality we seek be defined as equal achievement rather than equal treatment? Should a group right to equal success supplant the individual rights to equal protection of the laws and to equal freedom in the pursuit of happiness? I see no reason for believing in the new commandment.

Our attempt to find a source for the new command- m e n t - w h e t h e r in the arguments of the report, in

pertinent religious principles, in the "scriptures" of our own political tradition, or in the implications of

the nondiscrimination principle--has failed.

Academic vs. Athletic Inequality When a cause cannot be found, it may be worth-

while to verify that the supposed effect actually


exists. In this case the effect in ques t ion is a belief.

Do the p r o p o n e n t s of the n e w c o m m a n d m e n t re-

ally be l ieve w h a t it declares? Are t h e y t ru ly con-

v inced that racial and e thn ic inequal i t ies in achieve-

m e n t are a great evil, w h i c h mus t be ended? As will

a p p e a r below, there is r eason to th ink that t hey are

not. It all seems to d e p e n d on w h o s e ach ievemen t

is unequal .

For many years, b lacks have great ly o u t n u m b e r e d

o t h e r a thle tes in profess iona l baske tba l l and foot-

ba l l .Though only 14% of the U.S. popu la t i on aged

20-34, blacks in 1997 w e r e 79% of the p layers in the

National Basketbal l Associa t ion and 66% of the play-

ers in the Nat ional Footbal l League.The co r re spond-

ing figures for wh i t e s w e r e 20% and 31%; for Latinos,

less than 1% in b o t h cases. These inequal i t ies we re

typical for the 1990s.

Is there an advoca te of racial equal i ty in achieve-

m e n t w h o is u p s e t at these gaps? Certainly, n o n e

campaigns for the i r abol i t ion. If p ressed , m e m b e r s

of the Task Force migh t insis t that t hey are con-

c e r n e d wi th academic no t a thle t ic ach ievemen t .We

could r e s p o n d w i th the r e m i n d e r that these a thle tes

make a pile of money: inequa l i t i es in athlet ic achieve-

m e n t can p r o d u c e large inequal i t ies in occupa t iona l

earnings.

But let us r e tu rn to academic inequality. Cons ider

the s i tuat ion in the state that is said to fo r e shadow

the d e m o g r a p h i c fu ture of the nation. In 1996, the

p o p u l a t i o n of California was abou t half wh i t e and

half p e o p l e of color. Full el igibil i ty for admiss ion that

y e a r to t he Un ive r s i t y o f Cal i forn ia sy s t em was

awarded to the t op 11% of high-school graduates ,

as d e t e r m i n e d by a s ta tewide compa r i son of grades, cou r se c o n t e n t and tes t scores . F rom each racial

g roup the pe rcen t age w h o ga ined this pr ize differed

enormous ly : 30% of Asian graduates, 13% of whi tes ,

4% of Latinos and 3% of blacks. Whi t e s thus per-

fo rmed th ree or four t imes as wel l as Latinos and

blacks, whi le Asians d id a lmost three t imes as wel l

as whi tes . In pe r cen t age points , the gap b e t w e e n

Asians and whi t e s was w i d e r than the gap b e t w e e n

whi t e s and Latinos or blacks.

Point ing to these figures, w e may ask the repor t :

Are these racial gaps in academic ach ievemen t ac-

cep tab le? Answer : The gaps b e t w e e n w h i t e s and

Latinos o r blacks are absolu te ly unaccep t a b l e and

mus t be e l iminated. Quest ion: Is the gap b e t w e e n

Asians and whi t e s also unaccep tab le? Answer: The

r e p o r t no tes the ex i s tence of gaps b e t w e e n these

two groups, bu t does no t discuss the i r acceptabi l -

ity. Quest ion: Should specia l educa t iona l efforts be

des igned for W h i t e s tudents , to he lp t h e m m a t c h

Asian a c h i e v e m e n t s ? Answer : The r e p o r t is con-

c e r n e d w i t h b lack , Lat ino and Nat ive A m e r i c a n

progress ; n o n e of its r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s are des igned

to improve wh i t e pe r fo rmance .

There it is. The n e w c o m m a n d m e n t does no t

c o m m a n d its o w n soldiers. W h e n b lack academic

ach ievement is unequal to whi te , the c o m m a n d m e n t

sounds loud and clear; w h e n whi te ach i evemen t is

unequa l to Asian, the c o m m a n d m e n t vanishes. It is

no t a p r inc ip le of racial justice, but a lever for racial

favorit ism.

If the au thors of the r e p o r t saw the command-

m e n t as a p r inc ip l e of justice, t hey w o u l d apply it

to the As ian /whi te gap .And no t only that! Consider-

ing any large racial or e thn ic inequal i ty in academic

ach ievemen t to be unaccep tab le , t hey w o u l d seek

to e l i m i n a t e such i ne qua l i t i e s a m o n g the m a n y

whi te , black, Latino and Asian e thn ic subgroups in

America . In mos t of these cases:, no one tabula tes

g roup pe r fo rmance , so w e do no t k n o w w h e t h e r

significant inequal i t ies exist. But ignorance is surely

no excuse . If t hey are truly unaccep tab le , w e should

unc ove r t h e m and remove any that w e find.

Speaking as a wh i t e Amer i can scholar, w h o has

long b e e n aware of wh i t e infer ior i ty to b lackAmer i -

cans in m u c h a th le t ic a c h i e v e m e n t and to Asian

Amer icans in m u c h academic ach ievement , I may

say that ne i the r fact has ever cos t m e a m o m e n t ' s

s l eep .They are pseudo-prob lems . So far as I can see,

t hey do no t affect my oppor tuni ty , or that of a rela-

tive, fr iend, n e i g h b o r or fel low-cit izen, to succeed

as an a thle te or a scholar. Wha t mat te rs is w h e t h e r

you have w h a t is n e e d e d for the w o r k at hand. If

you do, it canno t be taken f rom you by the infer ior

p e r f o r m a n c e of your racial group. If you do not, it

canno t be imp lan t ed in you by your g roup ' s statisti-

cal success. Individual pe rsons , no t racial averages,

p lay football , solve equat ions or t reat disease.

All this assumes that these whi te inferiori t ies have

no t b e e n the resul t of racial d i sc r imina t ion against

wh i t e s in favor of blacks and Asians. If, on the con-

trary, the inequal i t ies had b e e n caused b y discrimi-

nat ion, there w o u l d be good reason for concern . But

the w r o n g to be c o m b a t e d in that case w o u l d be

unequal t rea tment , not unequa l ach ievement .

A de fender of the r epo r t might c o n c e d e that the

n e w c o m m a n d m e n t is a rhe tor ica l f lourish, that no

one ser iously bel ieves that the re mus t be equal aca-

demic ach ievemen t amongAsians ,Whi tes and a hun-

d red e thn ic groups. But this, he might add, is no t

the issue. The Task Force was convened , as the re-

p o r t states, w i th a specif ic p r o b l e m in mind: "the

chronica l ly l imi ted p re sence of African Americans ,


Latinos, and Native Americans among high achieving students at all levels of the educational system" (p. v.). Having studied the problem, the Task Force recommends race-exclusive programs for improv- ing academic performance in these three groups. Is not this a desirable goal? Are not these means rea- sonably designed to promote it?

The reader will recall that student performance on the NAEP tests is classified as Advanced, Profi-

cient, Basic and Below Basic. Concretely, what the

report seeks is to help a large number of black, Latino

and Native American students move up from Profi- cient toAdvanced, in reading, mathematics and other

subjects, from the early grades through high school. Assuming the availability of resources, few would

deny the desirability of helping Proficient students to reach the Advanced level. But why limit the goal by race? There are large numbers of white and Asian Proficient students w h o also might become Ad- vanced if given better educational opportunities.The

benefits of better performance, to the successful

students and to society as a whole, presumably ex-

ist regardless of the race of the person who im-

proves. What is needed by society for its work, and by

each person for his or her fulfillment, is individual improvement.The improvement in quality when a white or Asian student rises from Proficient to Ad- vanced is just as large as when a black or Latino makes the same progress. Greater individual improvement is better than less, but equal improvement does not

become greater because of a person's race. Back for a moment to professional basketball.

Perhaps there are fans who would enjoy it more if

the teams' racial proportions were different. But what counts for the vast majority is how well the game is played.The farts do discriminate in their af- fections, occasionally on the basis of race, but over- whelmingly on the basis of athletic excellence.They know that high achievement is rare, they want it on their team, and they lavish its exemplars with world- wide popularity.

Excellence is no less rare and no less needed in the professions, business and government-- in doc- tors, judges, entrepreneurs, teachers, scientists, en-

gineers, administrators, politicians and so on. In its

pursuit of excellence, the report advocates a huge

expansion of educational opportunities for those students (Latino, black and Native American) who are projected in 2015 to constitute two-fifths of the population under 18. But if you are hunting for trea-

sure, why avoid three-fifths of the spots where it

might be found?

Now it may be argued that:(1) we hack the resources to provide extra educational opportunities for all stu-

dents, (2) since we have to make choices, it is better to focus on minority groups whose mean achievement is substantially below the national average, and (3) these students would gain more from the interven- tion, because among them the difference between actual and potential achievement is presumably greater.

Closing the Gap in Potential vs. Per formance This third point is not broached in the report,

but is it nevertheless crucial to its reasoning? Did the Task Force in fact assume that, despite large ra-

cial and ethnic gaps in academic performance, no such differences exist in academic potential? People who make this assumption do not claim that every member of every group has the same academic po-

tential, but do claim that the average and the distribution ofindividuaI potential in each group are similar. If racial groups are thus alike in potential but

unlike in performance, it follows, of course, that the gap between performance and potential is greater

for some groups than others. If this is so, it would be reasonable to believe that supplementary, high- quality educational programs would do far more for the racial groups where the gap is widest.

Is the gap between academic potential and performance significantly greater for some racial groups than others? To measure the gap in individuals we have fallible but valuable tools. IQ tests estimate academic potential, while course work and achievement tests show what has actually been learned. For three-

quarters of a century, schools have used this combi-

nation to determine whether an individual student is performing below his or her potential

As far as I know, racial comparisons of IQ and achievement test scores do not bolster the thesis that the gap between potentiality and performance is appreciably larger for members of some races than for others. Certainly, no data in the report support this conclusion. On the contrary, the group results of IQ tests tend to correspond with the results of achievement tests: there are substantial racial differences in potential as well as in achievement, but not much racial difference in the gap between potentiality and achievement.

It is often charged that IQ tests underestimate

minority academic potential. This charge, if true, would be easy to verify. One need only demonstrate that IQ tests of Black, Latino or Native American children tend to under-predict their academic performance. Such a tendency, though eagerly sought, has not been found.


Although the racial differences in the degree to which students fulfill their potential are insignifi- cant, the individual differences can be huge.A wise use of scarce educational resources would be to serve those individuals, regardless of race, in whom the difference between actual and potential achieve-

ment is greatest.

Counteracting Educational Disadvantages Another possible justification for confining ex-

tra educational opportunities to underrepresented minorities is the argument from disadvantage. The report points to research indicating that the disadvan-

tages of poverty, lower parental education, inferior school resources and less effective cultural practices

negatively influence academic achievement for all students, regardless of race. Since black, Latino and Na-

tive Americans are over-represented among students with these disadvantages, the report argues that this

fact helps to cause the racial achievement gaps and

justifies a race-exclusive strategy for eliminating them. Although no attempt is made to quantify the im-

pact of these disadvantages on individual academic achievement or on the racial gaps, no one would deny that they are barriers to academic progress. However, as the report notes, their operation is col- orblind.when schools are substandard--their teachers incompetent, their libraries and laboratories ill-

equipped--all their pupils suffer, regardless of race. Some of us have long advocated programs de-

signed to counteract this disadvantage: e.g., summer

academies, sponsored by the state or federal gov-

ernment, to provide high-class, supplementary education for children who attend incompetent schools. Enrollment would be open to all such pupils, regardless of their race. If most students in the failed school are black, Latino and Native American, so would be mos t - -but not all--of those eligible for the summer academy.The same principle applies to attempts to counter other disadvantages mentioned in the report.The extra education should be offered to those who suffer the disadvantage.When certain racial groups predominate among students who are

poor, go to bad schools, have poorly educated par-

ents and/or lack certain cultural advantages, it is fair and reasonable that they predominate in the special programs. But it is neither fair nor reasonable

that programs established to counteract educational disadvantages should exclude, because of race, any student who suffers them.Are members of the Task

Force really prepared to stand at the door of educa-

tional opportunity, like Governor Wallace of old,

barring access because of race?

Racial and ethnic discrimination and prejudice in America, the report maintains, have had a large adverse impact on the academic performance of "underrepresented" minority students. No attempt is made to estimate how large. Having adopted the position that the performance gaps between white

and black, Latino or NativeAmericans must be eliminated, no matter what or where the sources, the

Task Force is not under pressure to ascribe the gaps

wholly or mostly to discrimination. The report 's views concerning the role of dis-

crimination and prejudice are largely speculative, un- substantiated and conceptually tmclear. For example,

it points to two factors that may involve substantial racial discrimination or prejudice: the widespread existence of racial separation in neighborhoods and

schools, and the possibility that m:my teachers have lower expectations of minority students. Unfortunately,

there is no effort to analyze the cause of the separation or to measure its impact on the performance gaps. Likewise, the report offers no data measuring

the prevalence and impact of lower expectations. When middle-class families, predominantly but

not exclusively white, flee inner-city schools, are they motivated by racial prejudice or by factual de- dines in student safety, classroom discipline and academic standards?When student IQ scores and parents' social and economic status are statistically controlled,

do black, Latino and Native American students learn more in racially mixed or predominantly non-white

schools? When teachers have lower expectations of

certain minority students, are they based on the past performance of the individuals in question or on ra-

cial or ethnic bias? In schools where such bias is widespread, what is the effect on student achievement?

IS Discrimination a Cause of Inequality? Much of the data that would be necessary for

determining valid statistical correlations between historical discrimination and current achievement gaps is probably no longer available. Even a schol- arly consensus on the relative effects of present discrimination seems unlikely. But all this uncertainty

need not impede the practical tasks of finding and

helping individual students, regardless of race, with the greatest potential for improvement, and of identi- fying schools, regardless of race,whose incompetence

wan-ants supplementary programs. Nor should it stop us from trying to prevent acts of racial discrimination.

Educators who treat people differently, based on their

race, should be held accountable, in morality and law. Victims of such treatment deserve amends-- not because of their race but for their injury.


Which brings us to the report's position on the morality of unequal treatment based on race. Such treatment is unhesitatingly condemned, when directed against black, Latino and Native Americans, but ignored or condoned when directed against whites. Half a century ago, our society decided to prohibit racial discrimination in education as mor-

ally wrong, regardless of the race of the person dis- criminated against. The report's recommendations

not only violate this ban; they completely ignore it. That is a tremendous mistake. To my mind, the

greatest moral achievement of the twentieth cen-

tury was the adoption by the United States (and many other nations) of the rule against racial or ethnic discrimination in the distribution of social goods. This principle is an indispensable barrier to racial and ethnic favoritism, which all through history has generated internecine conflict, antagonism, hatred, oppression and war.

"Reaching the Top," the report of the College

Board'sTask Force on Minority HighAchievement,

began by unfurling a "moral and pragmative im-

perative" to eliminate racial inequality in academic achievement. Instead of persuading the reader to believe in this new commandment , the report (un- intentionally) revealed that its authors do not. Still, it warranted evaluation simply as a proposal to

improve black, Latino and Native American academic achievement,via race-exclusive educational programs sponsored by public and private agen-

cies. The report assumed that black, Latino and Na-

tive American academic potential is currently less

tapped than white andAsian potential,which would give additional educational programs for these groups a greater social payoff. But no evidence was offered of racial inequality in the average distance between student potentiality and performance.The greatest social payoff, for efforts designed to help under-achieving students rise to their potential, ac- crues when the programs reach those individuals,

regardless of race, in whom the potentiality/performance gap is widest.

The report pointed to research indicating that poverty, low parental educat ion, i ncompe ten t

schools and poor cultural practices negatively affect

academic achievement, and that "underrepresented" minorities disproportionately suffer these disadvantages. But it was not maintained that all or only black, Latino and Native Americans face these obstacles, and no reason was given why white andAsianAmeri-

cans who share them should be barred from programs designed to counteract them.

The report declared that the impact of racial discrimination and prejudice on the gaps in academic performance is large.This assumption was not applied to the gap between whites and Asians. No one would deny that adverse discrimination and prejudice have affected academic achievement, but no evidence was cited that would specify or quantify the impact.

The tone of the Task Force report suggests the

confidence of people engaged in a sacred mission,

where policy is validated by good intentions, despite its empirical, conceptual and moral flaws. A substantial portion of currentAmerican idealism ste-

reotypes black, Latino and Native Americans as the underdogs of our society and makes the improve-

ment of their condition a high cause.To this mindset, it is more interesting and valuable to serve students of "underrepresented" races, regardless of their individual promise or disadvantage. A similar bias fa- voring white orAsian students because of their race would be condemned by the Task Force as racial prejudice, and rightly so.

The integrity of American education is better served by programs and teachers eager to assist prom- ising or disadvantaged students,regardless of their race. And, one should add, the integrity of the College Board as a testing institution should require that it not favor any (racial or other) group that it tests_

SUGGESTED FURTHER READINGS

California Postsecondary Education Commission.

1996 Eligibility Rates, <<www.cpec.ca.gov/

repor ts/96elig/elig5 .htm>> Center for the Study of Sport in Society.Annual

"Racial Report Cards," <<www.sportinsociety.org>>

Jencks, Christopher and Phillips, Meredith, eds., The Black-White Test Score Gap. Washington, D.C: The Brookings Institution, 1998.

National Assessment of Educational Progress. "The Nation's Report Card," for reading (1998) and mathematics (1996), <<www.nces.ed.gov/ nationsreportcard>>

National Center for Education Statistics The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten

Class of 1998-99, <<www.nces.ed.gov/

pubsearch/>> Search under release date: Feb 17, 2000.

Curtis Crawford is a retired educator and clergy- man. He is the author o f "Weighing the Benefits and Costs o f Racial Preference in College Admis- sions," Society, May/June 2000.


Documents

Racial promotion through racial exclusion