...all children could and should be inventors of their own theories, critics of other people's ideas, analyzers of evidence, and makers of their own personal marks on this most complex world.  It's an idea with revolutionary implications.  If we take it seriously.

Differences in achievement among and between children who are given or claim membership in particular groups (e.g., special education, English language learner, or particular racial and ethnic groups) can be evidence that schools are not effectively teaching ALL students. Yet, there is danger in using between group differences to construct what is typically referred to as a gap - a gap in achievement, in readiness for school, in graduation rates, and in other ways that we might categorize and count difference.  One of the clear dangers in making between group comparisons is that the cause for the problem is often, at least covertly, assumed to be within the group, rather than within the system that creates the categories, the ways of understanding difference and what might lead to making the difference.  What we measure and look at often obscures what we need to examine and understand.   If we can understand that within and between group differences are indices of deep and critical issues that constrain redistribution of resources, opportunities to learn, and genuine participation, calling out these differences can be beneficial.

An important way of thinking about how difference and deficit get constructed is embedded within the tools that we use to understand individual performance. [i]Claude Steele studied the concept of stereotype threat in which individuals who identify with a particular group (e.g., Black or African Americans) underperform in tests that measure their academic ability because they have internalized stereotypes that perpetuate an idea that the group they identify with is thought to have diminished academic ability when compared to White counterparts. By this he suggests that the institutionalized message that students from minority groups receive and internalize over time, as they compare their performance and the feedback they receive in school with other groups of students, transfers into assessment contexts. This is but one of a number of studies that have demonstrated how bias embedded with institutional histories impact how children perform.  Such an explanation, described in empirical studies published in peer reviewed research articles, shifts the responsibility from the group and individual histories to the presumptions and assumptions made within an institutional culture that reifies and circulates particular kinds of conventional wisdom.

If our examination of "difference" only leads to the conclusion that we need to fix people rather than systems, then we limit our opportunities to reform systems in ways that eliminate achievement differences.  This month's Equity Matters features resources and programs that help shift how schools examine, respond to, and prevent achievement differences between groups.