UC Berkeley

Abstract:

Framing the Gap

by

Chela Myesha Delgado

Doctor of Philosophy in Education

University of California, Berkeley

Professor Na'ilah Nasir, Chair

During her 2006 speech to the American Educational Research Association, educational researcher and then-AERA president Gloria Ladson-Billings called into question "the wisdom of focusing on the achievement gap as a way of explaining and understanding the persistent inequality that exists (and has always existed) in our nation's schools" (Ladson Billings 2006). What for so long had been considered a `gap', Ladson-Billings posited, could be more accurately considered a debt owed to children of color by schools. Ladson-Billings' reframing of the gap as a debt insisted on a recognition of the historical and contemporary institutional racism of schooling. Calls to re-frame the gap around the effects of structural racism and examine the culpability of schools and schooling systems as a factor of racial inequity, however, have gone largely unheeded. Instead, a majority of national education reform efforts insist on additional academic and behavioral effort on the part of teachers and students as the most effective means to raise the achievement of students of color (Apple 2001, Leonardo 2007, Darling-Hammond 2010, Tyack 1995, Valencia 1997 and 2010).

The disconnect between the marketized trend in national education reforms and grounded in a vision of racial justice begged the following research questions:

* How does the public understand the achievement gap as a representation of racial inequity in education?

* How do frames of the achievement gap shape national perceptions of racial inequality?

* What are the possibilities and limitations of these frames for capturing the historical and contemporary roots of racial inequality in schools?

* Which frames have been most operationalized in education reform and why?

* What are the opportunities and limitations for parents and youth of color to critique and transform dominant frames of the achievement gap?

I sought to answer these research questions through a combination of methods: the first was a critical discourse analysis of mainstream representations of the achievement gap. I read and synthesized over 600 articles, reports, policy briefs and speeches to assess the primary frames through which the achievement gap was discussed. To fully understand the ways in which education reform leaders discuss and understand the racial achievement gap, my analytical method of analyzing frames was key. The second research method was a four year ethnography of the 2008-2012 "Voices of the Next Generation" campaign of the San Francisco-based Coleman Advocates, a membership-based community organization of Pacific Islander, Latino and African-American parents and students. Coleman's local organizing work stands in contrast to both mainstream education reform and the media-generated national picture of parents of color--and particularly Black parents--either supporting conservative trends in education or showing little interest in their children's education (Pedroni 2007).

My findings show that education reforms intended to narrow or close the achievement gap are grounded in a wide spectrum of diagnostic frames (Goffman 1976, Snow & Benford 2000) --attempts to `diagnose' or explain the achievement gap, and prognostic frames--attempts to solve the gap. In my first chapter, I explain how the gap is measured framing theory as a method of discourse analysis I employ in order to understand dissonant approaches of education reformers in regard to the gap. Chapter two examines the history and origins of racialized educations assessment and the phenomenon of the achievement gap, along with its concurrent diagnostic frames. In Chapter three, I write about the dominant frame in educational reforms designed to close the gap--that of the market. Chapter four details the civil rights and racial justice frames, which seek to recenter racism as an active cause of the gap, and chapter five examines Coleman Advocates' on-the-group attempt to implement an education campaign in San Francisco, California, using the racial justice lens.

Finally, I assessed the tensions of these frames. To gain credibility, market-based education reformers have sought to align themselves with parents of color (Hursch 2007, Kumashiro 2008, Pedroni 2007, Stulberg 2008). Underneath the surface, however, it is clear that Black and Latino parents have been more concerned with racial equity in schooling than enamored with standardized tests or charter schools (Mediratta 2001, 2002, 2009; Oakes 2006; Research for Action 2002). As community-based education organization scholar Kavitta Mediratta finds, school reform in the hands of Black and Latino parents often includes demands for culturally relevant curriculum; an end to the system of tracking; mandatory parent communication protocols for teachers; increased teacher quality, improved access for newcomer and special education students to college prep courses; progressive discipline systems; and replacing standardized testing completely with culturally relevant, authentic assessments (field notes, February 7, 2009). Because Coleman is an organized vehicle through which the voices of those most affected by both the achievement gap and education reforms can be heard, the group's work provides a unique opportunity to study and assess an "on the ground" effort to redefine the terms of the educational debate and to win concrete reforms. My research overall seeks to interrogate the commonsense term "achievement gap"; expose the racial framings that shape reform; reexamine the national forces of market-based education; and explore the complexities and challenges of promoting racial justice-based approaches to education reform.