Assignment Prompt & Instructions
**files (2)**
– ## ethnicidentity.pdf
– Screenshot_20261019_100401_Canvas.jpg
**## ethnicidentity.pdf**
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
58
Multicultural Reviews
Ethnic Identity and Its Relationship
with School Achievement
Multicultural Reviews
Rosa Hernández Sheets
The achievement gap disparity in
school performance associated with eth-
nicity shows up in high school graduation
rates, test scores, grades, drop-out rates,
and college completion. It is one of the
most urgent problems in public schooling.
Researchers can use ethnicity to predict
the schooling outcomes of millions of
children by the end of their kindergarten
year. According to Johnson and Viadero,
by 2019, at age 24, European American
children entering kindergarten in Fall
2000, “will be twice as likely as their
African American classmates, and three
times as likely as Hispanics, to have a
college degree” (p. 1).
Some scholars who examine explana-
tions for the achievement gap identify
factors such as fl aws within the tests them-
selves, characteristics inherent in low-
performing students and their families,
and inadequacies of classroom teachers
(Orfi eld & Kornhaber, 2001; Madaus &
Clark, 2001). They point out that the fl aws
within the tests themselves challenge their
validity. Tests are unfair, culturally biased,
do not test what is being taught/learned
in school, and are not aligned with state
and school standards or with textbook
content.
Other explanations focus on blaming
students and their families. Individuals
holding this viewpoint argue that low-per-
forming students are: poor, unmotivated,
unskilled, have parents that do not care,
do not have books in the home, come from
single-parent households, are linguistically
defi cient, and watch too much television
(Sheets, 2005). These critics believe that
students may dismiss the rewards or
punishments attached to tests and may
put forth minimal effort. They argue that
low-performing students are not motivated
to take the test. Cultural variations in par-
enting, differences in cultural values and
practices, and diverse linguistic skills are
viewed as defi cit factors affecting school
achievement.
The responsibility is also placed on
teachers (Goodwin, 2002). Individuals who
blame teachers maintain that the cultural
mismatch between teachers and students
creates incompatible learning conditions.
Teachers may not have strong academic
backgrounds in the subjects they teach
and may not know how to teach their as-
signed subjects or grade level. Teachers in
low-performing schools are more likely to
be uncredentialed, have low expectations
for their students, teach less because they
spend most of their time handling disciplin-
ary issues, rarely teach reasoning skills, do
not offer students a rigorous curricula, and
are often absent from the classroom.
The Review
In Dismantling Educational Inequal-
ity: A Cultural-Historical Approach to Clos-
ing the Achievement Gap, Pedro R. Portes
(2005), an educational psychologist and
Fulbright scholar, critically examines why
and how the achievement gap persists. He
takes a different approach to discuss why
conditions, in and out of school, encour-
age and perpetuate what he calls Group
Based Inequality (GBI) (Portes, 1996). This
review summarizes the content of the text
and concludes with a discussion.
Dismantling Educational Inequality:
A Critical-Historical Approach
to Closing the Achievement Gap
By Pedro R. Portes
New York: Peter Lang, 2005
www.peterlangusa.com
ISBN 0-8204-7606-4
paperback, 306 pgs., $34.95
Portes organizes the text in three sec-
tions: Part I—Defi ning the Problem; Part
II—A Cultural Approach to a Historical
Problem; and Part III—Transforming the
Education of Educators and Policy Makers.
Each part is summarized.
Part I:
Defi ning the Problem
This section opens with the power-
ful, dissenting opinion from Justice Felix
Frankfurter in Dennis v. United States,
339 US 184 in 1949 — “there is no greater
inequality than the equal treatment of
unequals” (p. 3). This statement can be
applied to the issues facing most students
who differ ethnically and economically
from European American mainstream
students. While academic prospects may
be present in K-12 schools, Portes explains
why access to these opportunities may be
problematic, or in some cases impossible.
In the fi rst segment, Portes points
out that schooling, as a culturing prac-
tice, is designed to benefi t mainstream,
middle-class students. As a result, those
who do not fi t this model may be system-
atically disadvantaged. Many students
placed at risk (SPARs) in schools can be
identifi ed through individual and group
membership—in particular, ethnic, minor-
ity groups. They do not receive equitable
access to available instruction. The result
is a predictive achievement gap or Group-
Based Inequality that “occurs when the
same teaching has different consequences
on students because of their prior knowl-
edge, development, cultural context, status,
and power relative to others” (p. 43).
Portes (2005) argues that the cultur-
ally incompatible schooling conditions
experienced by children from historically,
established minority, ethnic groups often
results in damage to their identity devel-
opment. According to Portes, the question
becomes, do we really want to eradicate
the achievement gap? If yes, how can we
build equitable schooling environments
that support positive identity development
and insure achievement outcomes? How do
we correct teacher preparation programs
that can adequately prepare the majority
of teachers from one culture to teach the
children who come from another culture.
A cultural developmental approach is
SUMMER 2006
59
Multicultural Reviews
needed—children’s cultural competencies
must be linked to the teaching-learning
process. Teachers must acquire this knowl-
edge base and understand how to apply this
culturally inclusive learning process in the
classroom. “To reduce the gap, school learn-
ing needs to depend less on SES mediated
parental support” (p. 77).
Part II:
A Cultural Approach
to a Historical Problem
According to Portes, “the achievement
gap has been historically determined by vir-
tue of compounding poverty, lesser educa-
tional opportunities, and expectations with
ethnicity—and in many cases, long periods
of oppression” (p. 98). Children who match
the culture and class of the dominant group
generally succeed, those that do not usually
fail, and this lack of success exacerbates
over time. Unfortunately, culture-class,
dependent schools create and reproduce
student and teacher failure.
To reverse the trend of failure for
students who differ from the mainstream
ethnically and economically, Portes proposes
a multiple-focused curriculum that includes
human development and life-skills that
prepares adolescents for careers and future
parenthood. He maintains equipping adoles-
cents with knowledge and skills to handle
life’s issues improves not only their own life
style but that of future generations. This
approach requires reforming current policies
and procedures and implementing critical
changes in the way we prepare teachers.
Since “risk behaviors are often fueled
by risk conditions” (p. 122), Portes theorizes
that a comprehensive life-skills curriculum,
rich with critical thinking skills, especially
at the secondary level, can prepare adoles-
cents to better parent their children which
may promote greater parental involvement
in the schooling of those children. He envi-
sions a spiral curricular approach with hu-
man growth and development as a specifi c,
curricular component.
He theorizes that young SPARs would
view this component of the curriculum
as relevant and applicable to solving
problems in their immediate life. This
strategy, preventive rather than reactive
in nature, might improve the massive
inequality present in the current, public
school experiences of SPARs. It also has
the potential of minimizing parental social
class differences in school involvement.
A second component, in Portes’ vision
to help “offset the massive, disadvantages
children from poor underrepresented
groups face” (p. 166) and to eliminate the
achievement gap for SPARs, is preschool
programs. First, access to effective, high
quality preschool opportunities which fo-
cus on the socio-cognitive development of
young poor children, with parental involve-
ment, must be extended to all SPARs, not
just to a selected few.
This component is critical because
most SPAR preschoolers attend substan-
dard, lower quality public schools located
in poor neighborhoods and staffed with
less qualifi ed teachers. These phenomena
reinforce inequalities in schooling condi-
tions at the onset of their school life. These
negative schooling experiences set the stage
for damaged identities to develop. Thus,
for the most part, SPARs face consistent,
systematic inequitable, unethical schooling
deprivations from “start to fi nish” (p. 155).
To prevent the one- to-three-year
achievement gaps that materialize early in
the elementary grades, Portes’s plan includes
an elementary component. He believes that
an effective elementary school component
must include improved teaching-learning
conditions in the classroom and increased
after-school resources to the child, family,
and community. These activities must in-
volve children in after-school mentoring and
academic clubs. Portes also argues that a
change in the culturing process of schooling
demands that the actions of school personnel
be evaluated and addressed.
Part III:
Transforming the Education
of Educators and Policy Makers
According to Portes, a transformation
in the existing programs in higher educa-
tion that prepare teachers, administrators,
counselors, and policymakers must take
place. For example, he advocates a cultural-
historical approach to the preparation of
educators. This method promotes (a) knowl-
edge of the societal, political, and academic
factors, in and out of school, infl uencing
achievement gaps to emerge and fl ourish in
schools; and, (b) knowledge of human devel-
opment theory and research and life skills;
and, the ability to apply this information
in a culturally inclusive teaching-learning
process responsive to SPARs.
Portes, believing that “substantial
changes” must be made in the ways schools
are designed and organized, concludes with
policy recommendations. One of his sug-
gestions focuses on the ways institutions
of higher education prepare teachers, ad-
ministrators, counselors, and other school
personnel. He argues that we must identify
a common knowledge base and strategic
plan that is shared in the academy. Finally,
he cautions that “more of the same” will not
be enough, if we are serious about improv-
ing schooling conditions for those who are
most underserved.
Discussion
Clearly, understanding the role of
ethnicity in the human developmental
process may be key to conceptualizing ways
to improve the teaching-learning process
in ways that minimize or eliminate the
growing achievement gap among diverse
groups of children. Understandings of
ethnic identity formation and development
(of self and others) and its relationship to
achievement outcomes may be central to
changing classroom and school practices.
In Dismantling Educational Inequity:
A Cultural-Historical Approach to Closing
the Achievement Gap, Portes provides a
multi-level, policy-orientated framework
that explicitly acknowledges students’
socialization process, in and out of school,
to understand how identity development,
which includes ethnicity as a critical vari-
able, impacts achievement outcomes.
This text presents a clear, contex-
tual, operational defi nition of the construct
achievement gap. Portes advances under-
standings of the factors, in and out of school,
that contribute to the lack of academic
success by many children, especially eco-
nomically poor children with membership
in ethnic minority groups. This is a major
contribution to the scholarship because
this foundation can help educators frame
the issues facing children who are the least
advantaged
Portes discusses some of the limita-
tions inherent in the ways educators have
attempted to address the achievement gap.
For example, specifi c programs such as
Upward Bound, AVID, and Gear Up, have
focused on a select few. Also, preventive
actions, such as Head Start, created to
improve early learning of SPARs, service
only a small number of eligible children;
and these programs, as currently designed,
have negligible long-term results.
Portes maintains that these efforts,
while benefi cial to some children, seem to
center on “raising performance rather than
reducing the achievement gap” (p. 73). Ac-
cording to Portes, we must acknowledge
and address the challenge of creating,
implementing, and sustaining schooling
conditions that serve the needs of the mas-
sive numbers of SPARs who are currently
marginalized and underserved in schools.
Additionally, Portes points out that
serious problems in the schooling process,
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
60
Multicultural Reviews
such as tracking, and the possible elimina-
tion of these practices, may not necessarily
result in improved learning conditions for
the most affected students.
While he concedes that current tracking
practices in schools create learning conditions
for SPARs that place them at risk for learn-
ing, merely untracking may not be a viable
solution. He argues that “the system needs to
be untracked, rather than the students.” That
is, we need culturally-historically framed
changes in (a) the ways we prepare teach-
ers, counselors, and administrators, (b) the
curricular content, and (c) the instructional
process and context in classrooms.
This book provides a conceptual
framework, grounded in the cultural-his-
torical infl uences in human developmental
process, for understanding the achieve-
ment gap. While pointing out flaws in
the educational system and describing
the inequitable out of school conditions
experienced by children who live in pov-
erty, Portes also identifi es and describes
possible solutions for improving schooling
opportunities. He reminds us that achieve-
ment outcomes and equitable conditions in
schooling must not be based on skin color,
ethnic background, or on the economic sta-
tus of one’s parents. This groundbreaking
book, grounded in scholarship, is written in
a straight-forward and engaging format. It
is a ‘must read’ and ‘must have’ book in the
minds and libraries of educators seriously
concerned with reducing and eventually
eliminating the achievement gap.
References
Goodwin, L. (2002). Low teacher expectation
for children of color. Journal of Thought,
37(4), 83-104.
Johnson, R. C., & Viadero, D. (2000). Unmet
promise: Raising minority achievement.
Education Week, 1-10. Retrieved from http:/
www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory. cfm?slug=27
pagintro.h10
Madaus, G., & Clarke, M. (2001). The adverse
impact of high-stakes testing on minority
students: Evidence from one hundred years
of test data. In G. Orfi eld & M. Kornhaber
(Eds.), Raising standards or barriers? In-
equality and high stakes testing in public
education (pp. 85-106). New York: Century
Foundation.
Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. (Eds.). (2001).
Raising standards or barriers? Inequality
and high stakes testing in public education.
New York: Century Foundation.
Portes, P. R. (1996). Ethnicity and culture in
educational psychology. In D. C. Berliner & R.
C. Calfee (Eds.), The handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 331-357). New York: Simon,
Schuster, Macmillan.
Portes, P. R. (2005). Dismantling Educational
Inequality: A Critical-Historical Approach
to Closing the Achievement Gap. New York:
Peter Lang.
Sheets, R. H. (2005). Diversity pedagogy: Exam-
ining the role of culture in the teaching-learn-
ing process. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
—Rose Hernandez Sheets is
an associate professor
with Department of Curriculum and Instruction
in the College of Education
at Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, Texas.
**Screenshot_20261019_100401_Canvas.jpg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot-20261019-100401-canvas-jpg)
**Screenshot_20261019_100401_Canvas.jpg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot-20261019-100401-canvas-jpg)
**## ethnicidentity.pdf**
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
58
Multicultural Reviews
Ethnic Identity and Its Relationship
with School Achievement
Multicultural Reviews
Rosa Hernández Sheets
The achievement gap disparity in
school performance associated with eth-
nicity shows up in high school graduation
rates, test scores, grades, drop-out rates,
and college completion. It is one of the
most urgent problems in public schooling.
Researchers can use ethnicity to predict
the schooling outcomes of millions of
children by the end of their kindergarten
year. According to Johnson and Viadero,
by 2019, at age 24, European American
children entering kindergarten in Fall
2000, “will be twice as likely as their
African American classmates, and three
times as likely as Hispanics, to have a
college degree” (p. 1).
Some scholars who examine explana-
tions for the achievement gap identify
factors such as fl aws within the tests them-
selves, characteristics inherent in low-
performing students and their families,
and inadequacies of classroom teachers
(Orfi eld & Kornhaber, 2001; Madaus &
Clark, 2001). They point out that the fl aws
within the tests themselves challenge their
validity. Tests are unfair, culturally biased,
do not test what is being taught/learned
in school, and are not aligned with state
and school standards or with textbook
content.
Other explanations focus on blaming
students and their families. Individuals
holding this viewpoint argue that low-per-
forming students are: poor, unmotivated,
unskilled, have parents that do not care,
do not have books in the home, come from
single-parent households, are linguistically
defi cient, and watch too much television
(Sheets, 2005). These critics believe that
students may dismiss the rewards or
punishments attached to tests and may
put forth minimal effort. They argue that
low-performing students are not motivated
to take the test. Cultural variations in par-
enting, differences in cultural values and
practices, and diverse linguistic skills are
viewed as defi cit factors affecting school
achievement.
The responsibility is also placed on
teachers (Goodwin, 2002). Individuals who
blame teachers maintain that the cultural
mismatch between teachers and students
creates incompatible learning conditions.
Teachers may not have strong academic
backgrounds in the subjects they teach
and may not know how to teach their as-
signed subjects or grade level. Teachers in
low-performing schools are more likely to
be uncredentialed, have low expectations
for their students, teach less because they
spend most of their time handling disciplin-
ary issues, rarely teach reasoning skills, do
not offer students a rigorous curricula, and
are often absent from the classroom.
The Review
In Dismantling Educational Inequal-
ity: A Cultural-Historical Approach to Clos-
ing the Achievement Gap, Pedro R. Portes
(2005), an educational psychologist and
Fulbright scholar, critically examines why
and how the achievement gap persists. He
takes a different approach to discuss why
conditions, in and out of school, encour-
age and perpetuate what he calls Group
Based Inequality (GBI) (Portes, 1996). This
review summarizes the content of the text
and concludes with a discussion.
Dismantling Educational Inequality:
A Critical-Historical Approach
to Closing the Achievement Gap
By Pedro R. Portes
New York: Peter Lang, 2005
www.peterlangusa.com
ISBN 0-8204-7606-4
paperback, 306 pgs., $34.95
Portes organizes the text in three sec-
tions: Part I—Defi ning the Problem; Part
II—A Cultural Approach to a Historical
Problem; and Part III—Transforming the
Education of Educators and Policy Makers.
Each part is summarized.
Part I:
Defi ning the Problem
This section opens with the power-
ful, dissenting opinion from Justice Felix
Frankfurter in Dennis v. United States,
339 US 184 in 1949 — “there is no greater
inequality than the equal treatment of
unequals” (p. 3). This statement can be
applied to the issues facing most students
who differ ethnically and economically
from European American mainstream
students. While academic prospects may
be present in K-12 schools, Portes explains
why access to these opportunities may be
problematic, or in some cases impossible.
In the fi rst segment, Portes points
out that schooling, as a culturing prac-
tice, is designed to benefi t mainstream,
middle-class students. As a result, those
who do not fi t this model may be system-
atically disadvantaged. Many students
placed at risk (SPARs) in schools can be
identifi ed through individual and group
membership—in particular, ethnic, minor-
ity groups. They do not receive equitable
access to available instruction. The result
is a predictive achievement gap or Group-
Based Inequality that “occurs when the
same teaching has different consequences
on students because of their prior knowl-
edge, development, cultural context, status,
and power relative to others” (p. 43).
Portes (2005) argues that the cultur-
ally incompatible schooling conditions
experienced by children from historically,
established minority, ethnic groups often
results in damage to their identity devel-
opment. According to Portes, the question
becomes, do we really want to eradicate
the achievement gap? If yes, how can we
build equitable schooling environments
that support positive identity development
and insure achievement outcomes? How do
we correct teacher preparation programs
that can adequately prepare the majority
of teachers from one culture to teach the
children who come from another culture.
A cultural developmental approach is
SUMMER 2006
59
Multicultural Reviews
needed—children’s cultural competencies
must be linked to the teaching-learning
process. Teachers must acquire this knowl-
edge base and understand how to apply this
culturally inclusive learning process in the
classroom. “To reduce the gap, school learn-
ing needs to depend less on SES mediated
parental support” (p. 77).
Part II:
A Cultural Approach
to a Historical Problem
According to Portes, “the achievement
gap has been historically determined by vir-
tue of compounding poverty, lesser educa-
tional opportunities, and expectations with
ethnicity—and in many cases, long periods
of oppression” (p. 98). Children who match
the culture and class of the dominant group
generally succeed, those that do not usually
fail, and this lack of success exacerbates
over time. Unfortunately, culture-class,
dependent schools create and reproduce
student and teacher failure.
To reverse the trend of failure for
students who differ from the mainstream
ethnically and economically, Portes proposes
a multiple-focused curriculum that includes
human development and life-skills that
prepares adolescents for careers and future
parenthood. He maintains equipping adoles-
cents with knowledge and skills to handle
life’s issues improves not only their own life
style but that of future generations. This
approach requires reforming current policies
and procedures and implementing critical
changes in the way we prepare teachers.
Since “risk behaviors are often fueled
by risk conditions” (p. 122), Portes theorizes
that a comprehensive life-skills curriculum,
rich with critical thinking skills, especially
at the secondary level, can prepare adoles-
cents to better parent their children which
may promote greater parental involvement
in the schooling of those children. He envi-
sions a spiral curricular approach with hu-
man growth and development as a specifi c,
curricular component.
He theorizes that young SPARs would
view this component of the curriculum
as relevant and applicable to solving
problems in their immediate life. This
strategy, preventive rather than reactive
in nature, might improve the massive
inequality present in the current, public
school experiences of SPARs. It also has
the potential of minimizing parental social
class differences in school involvement.
A second component, in Portes’ vision
to help “offset the massive, disadvantages
children from poor underrepresented
groups face” (p. 166) and to eliminate the
achievement gap for SPARs, is preschool
programs. First, access to effective, high
quality preschool opportunities which fo-
cus on the socio-cognitive development of
young poor children, with parental involve-
ment, must be extended to all SPARs, not
just to a selected few.
This component is critical because
most SPAR preschoolers attend substan-
dard, lower quality public schools located
in poor neighborhoods and staffed with
less qualifi ed teachers. These phenomena
reinforce inequalities in schooling condi-
tions at the onset of their school life. These
negative schooling experiences set the stage
for damaged identities to develop. Thus,
for the most part, SPARs face consistent,
systematic inequitable, unethical schooling
deprivations from “start to fi nish” (p. 155).
To prevent the one- to-three-year
achievement gaps that materialize early in
the elementary grades, Portes’s plan includes
an elementary component. He believes that
an effective elementary school component
must include improved teaching-learning
conditions in the classroom and increased
after-school resources to the child, family,
and community. These activities must in-
volve children in after-school mentoring and
academic clubs. Portes also argues that a
change in the culturing process of schooling
demands that the actions of school personnel
be evaluated and addressed.
Part III:
Transforming the Education
of Educators and Policy Makers
According to Portes, a transformation
in the existing programs in higher educa-
tion that prepare teachers, administrators,
counselors, and policymakers must take
place. For example, he advocates a cultural-
historical approach to the preparation of
educators. This method promotes (a) knowl-
edge of the societal, political, and academic
factors, in and out of school, infl uencing
achievement gaps to emerge and fl ourish in
schools; and, (b) knowledge of human devel-
opment theory and research and life skills;
and, the ability to apply this information
in a culturally inclusive teaching-learning
process responsive to SPARs.
Portes, believing that “substantial
changes” must be made in the ways schools
are designed and organized, concludes with
policy recommendations. One of his sug-
gestions focuses on the ways institutions
of higher education prepare teachers, ad-
ministrators, counselors, and other school
personnel. He argues that we must identify
a common knowledge base and strategic
plan that is shared in the academy. Finally,
he cautions that “more of the same” will not
be enough, if we are serious about improv-
ing schooling conditions for those who are
most underserved.
Discussion
Clearly, understanding the role of
ethnicity in the human developmental
process may be key to conceptualizing ways
to improve the teaching-learning process
in ways that minimize or eliminate the
growing achievement gap among diverse
groups of children. Understandings of
ethnic identity formation and development
(of self and others) and its relationship to
achievement outcomes may be central to
changing classroom and school practices.
In Dismantling Educational Inequity:
A Cultural-Historical Approach to Closing
the Achievement Gap, Portes provides a
multi-level, policy-orientated framework
that explicitly acknowledges students’
socialization process, in and out of school,
to understand how identity development,
which includes ethnicity as a critical vari-
able, impacts achievement outcomes.
This text presents a clear, contex-
tual, operational defi nition of the construct
achievement gap. Portes advances under-
standings of the factors, in and out of school,
that contribute to the lack of academic
success by many children, especially eco-
nomically poor children with membership
in ethnic minority groups. This is a major
contribution to the scholarship because
this foundation can help educators frame
the issues facing children who are the least
advantaged
Portes discusses some of the limita-
tions inherent in the ways educators have
attempted to address the achievement gap.
For example, specifi c programs such as
Upward Bound, AVID, and Gear Up, have
focused on a select few. Also, preventive
actions, such as Head Start, created to
improve early learning of SPARs, service
only a small number of eligible children;
and these programs, as currently designed,
have negligible long-term results.
Portes maintains that these efforts,
while benefi cial to some children, seem to
center on “raising performance rather than
reducing the achievement gap” (p. 73). Ac-
cording to Portes, we must acknowledge
and address the challenge of creating,
implementing, and sustaining schooling
conditions that serve the needs of the mas-
sive numbers of SPARs who are currently
marginalized and underserved in schools.
Additionally, Portes points out that
serious problems in the schooling process,
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
60
Multicultural Reviews
such as tracking, and the possible elimina-
tion of these practices, may not necessarily
result in improved learning conditions for
the most affected students.
While he concedes that current tracking
practices in schools create learning conditions
for SPARs that place them at risk for learn-
ing, merely untracking may not be a viable
solution. He argues that “the system needs to
be untracked, rather than the students.” That
is, we need culturally-historically framed
changes in (a) the ways we prepare teach-
ers, counselors, and administrators, (b) the
curricular content, and (c) the instructional
process and context in classrooms.
This book provides a conceptual
framework, grounded in the cultural-his-
torical infl uences in human developmental
process, for understanding the achieve-
ment gap. While pointing out flaws in
the educational system and describing
the inequitable out of school conditions
experienced by children who live in pov-
erty, Portes also identifi es and describes
possible solutions for improving schooling
opportunities. He reminds us that achieve-
ment outcomes and equitable conditions in
schooling must not be based on skin color,
ethnic background, or on the economic sta-
tus of one’s parents. This groundbreaking
book, grounded in scholarship, is written in
a straight-forward and engaging format. It
is a ‘must read’ and ‘must have’ book in the
minds and libraries of educators seriously
concerned with reducing and eventually
eliminating the achievement gap.
References
Goodwin, L. (2002). Low teacher expectation
for children of color. Journal of Thought,
37(4), 83-104.
Johnson, R. C., & Viadero, D. (2000). Unmet
promise: Raising minority achievement.
Education Week, 1-10. Retrieved from http:/
www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory. cfm?slug=27
pagintro.h10
Madaus, G., & Clarke, M. (2001). The adverse
impact of high-stakes testing on minority
students: Evidence from one hundred years
of test data. In G. Orfi eld & M. Kornhaber
(Eds.), Raising standards or barriers? In-
equality and high stakes testing in public
education (pp. 85-106). New York: Century
Foundation.
Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. (Eds.). (2001).
Raising standards or barriers? Inequality
and high stakes testing in public education.
New York: Century Foundation.
Portes, P. R. (1996). Ethnicity and culture in
educational psychology. In D. C. Berliner & R.
C. Calfee (Eds.), The handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 331-357). New York: Simon,
Schuster, Macmillan.
Portes, P. R. (2005). Dismantling Educational
Inequality: A Critical-Historical Approach
to Closing the Achievement Gap. New York:
Peter Lang.
Sheets, R. H. (2005). Diversity pedagogy: Exam-
ining the role of culture in the teaching-learn-
ing process. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
—Rose Hernandez Sheets is
an associate professor
with Department of Curriculum and Instruction
in the College of Education
at Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, Texas.
**Screenshot_20261019_100401_Canvas.jpg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot-20261019-100401-canvas-jpg)
**## ethnicidentity.pdf**
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
58
Multicultural Reviews
Ethnic Identity and Its Relationship
with School Achievement
Multicultural Reviews
Rosa Hernández Sheets
The achievement gap disparity in
school performance associated with eth-
nicity shows up in high school graduation
rates, test scores, grades, drop-out rates,
and college completion. It is one of the
most urgent problems in public schooling.
Researchers can use ethnicity to predict
the schooling outcomes of millions of
children by the end of their kindergarten
year. According to Johnson and Viadero,
by 2019, at age 24, European American
children entering kindergarten in Fall
2000, “will be twice as likely as their
African American classmates, and three
times as likely as Hispanics, to have a
college degree” (p. 1).
Some scholars who examine explana-
tions for the achievement gap identify
factors such as fl aws within the tests them-
selves, characteristics inherent in low-
performing students and their families,
and inadequacies of classroom teachers
(Orfi eld & Kornhaber, 2001; Madaus &
Clark, 2001). They point out that the fl aws
within the tests themselves challenge their
validity. Tests are unfair, culturally biased,
do not test what is being taught/learned
in school, and are not aligned with state
and school standards or with textbook
content.
Other explanations focus on blaming
students and their families. Individuals
holding this viewpoint argue that low-per-
forming students are: poor, unmotivated,
unskilled, have parents that do not care,
do not have books in the home, come from
single-parent households, are linguistically
defi cient, and watch too much television
(Sheets, 2005). These critics believe that
students may dismiss the rewards or
punishments attached to tests and may
put forth minimal effort. They argue that
low-performing students are not motivated
to take the test. Cultural variations in par-
enting, differences in cultural values and
practices, and diverse linguistic skills are
viewed as defi cit factors affecting school
achievement.
The responsibility is also placed on
teachers (Goodwin, 2002). Individuals who
blame teachers maintain that the cultural
mismatch between teachers and students
creates incompatible learning conditions.
Teachers may not have strong academic
backgrounds in the subjects they teach
and may not know how to teach their as-
signed subjects or grade level. Teachers in
low-performing schools are more likely to
be uncredentialed, have low expectations
for their students, teach less because they
spend most of their time handling disciplin-
ary issues, rarely teach reasoning skills, do
not offer students a rigorous curricula, and
are often absent from the classroom.
The Review
In Dismantling Educational Inequal-
ity: A Cultural-Historical Approach to Clos-
ing the Achievement Gap, Pedro R. Portes
(2005), an educational psychologist and
Fulbright scholar, critically examines why
and how the achievement gap persists. He
takes a different approach to discuss why
conditions, in and out of school, encour-
age and perpetuate what he calls Group
Based Inequality (GBI) (Portes, 1996). This
review summarizes the content of the text
and concludes with a discussion.
Dismantling Educational Inequality:
A Critical-Historical Approach
to Closing the Achievement Gap
By Pedro R. Portes
New York: Peter Lang, 2005
www.peterlangusa.com
ISBN 0-8204-7606-4
paperback, 306 pgs., $34.95
Portes organizes the text in three sec-
tions: Part I—Defi ning the Problem; Part
II—A Cultural Approach to a Historical
Problem; and Part III—Transforming the
Education of Educators and Policy Makers.
Each part is summarized.
Part I:
Defi ning the Problem
This section opens with the power-
ful, dissenting opinion from Justice Felix
Frankfurter in Dennis v. United States,
339 US 184 in 1949 — “there is no greater
inequality than the equal treatment of
unequals” (p. 3). This statement can be
applied to the issues facing most students
who differ ethnically and economically
from European American mainstream
students. While academic prospects may
be present in K-12 schools, Portes explains
why access to these opportunities may be
problematic, or in some cases impossible.
In the fi rst segment, Portes points
out that schooling, as a culturing prac-
tice, is designed to benefi t mainstream,
middle-class students. As a result, those
who do not fi t this model may be system-
atically disadvantaged. Many students
placed at risk (SPARs) in schools can be
identifi ed through individual and group
membership—in particular, ethnic, minor-
ity groups. They do not receive equitable
access to available instruction. The result
is a predictive achievement gap or Group-
Based Inequality that “occurs when the
same teaching has different consequences
on students because of their prior knowl-
edge, development, cultural context, status,
and power relative to others” (p. 43).
Portes (2005) argues that the cultur-
ally incompatible schooling conditions
experienced by children from historically,
established minority, ethnic groups often
results in damage to their identity devel-
opment. According to Portes, the question
becomes, do we really want to eradicate
the achievement gap? If yes, how can we
build equitable schooling environments
that support positive identity development
and insure achievement outcomes? How do
we correct teacher preparation programs
that can adequately prepare the majority
of teachers from one culture to teach the
children who come from another culture.
A cultural developmental approach is
SUMMER 2006
59
Multicultural Reviews
needed—children’s cultural competencies
must be linked to the teaching-learning
process. Teachers must acquire this knowl-
edge base and understand how to apply this
culturally inclusive learning process in the
classroom. “To reduce the gap, school learn-
ing needs to depend less on SES mediated
parental support” (p. 77).
Part II:
A Cultural Approach
to a Historical Problem
According to Portes, “the achievement
gap has been historically determined by vir-
tue of compounding poverty, lesser educa-
tional opportunities, and expectations with
ethnicity—and in many cases, long periods
of oppression” (p. 98). Children who match
the culture and class of the dominant group
generally succeed, those that do not usually
fail, and this lack of success exacerbates
over time. Unfortunately, culture-class,
dependent schools create and reproduce
student and teacher failure.
To reverse the trend of failure for
students who differ from the mainstream
ethnically and economically, Portes proposes
a multiple-focused curriculum that includes
human development and life-skills that
prepares adolescents for careers and future
parenthood. He maintains equipping adoles-
cents with knowledge and skills to handle
life’s issues improves not only their own life
style but that of future generations. This
approach requires reforming current policies
and procedures and implementing critical
changes in the way we prepare teachers.
Since “risk behaviors are often fueled
by risk conditions” (p. 122), Portes theorizes
that a comprehensive life-skills curriculum,
rich with critical thinking skills, especially
at the secondary level, can prepare adoles-
cents to better parent their children which
may promote greater parental involvement
in the schooling of those children. He envi-
sions a spiral curricular approach with hu-
man growth and development as a specifi c,
curricular component.
He theorizes that young SPARs would
view this component of the curriculum
as relevant and applicable to solving
problems in their immediate life. This
strategy, preventive rather than reactive
in nature, might improve the massive
inequality present in the current, public
school experiences of SPARs. It also has
the potential of minimizing parental social
class differences in school involvement.
A second component, in Portes’ vision
to help “offset the massive, disadvantages
children from poor underrepresented
groups face” (p. 166) and to eliminate the
achievement gap for SPARs, is preschool
programs. First, access to effective, high
quality preschool opportunities which fo-
cus on the socio-cognitive development of
young poor children, with parental involve-
ment, must be extended to all SPARs, not
just to a selected few.
This component is critical because
most SPAR preschoolers attend substan-
dard, lower quality public schools located
in poor neighborhoods and staffed with
less qualifi ed teachers. These phenomena
reinforce inequalities in schooling condi-
tions at the onset of their school life. These
negative schooling experiences set the stage
for damaged identities to develop. Thus,
for the most part, SPARs face consistent,
systematic inequitable, unethical schooling
deprivations from “start to fi nish” (p. 155).
To prevent the one- to-three-year
achievement gaps that materialize early in
the elementary grades, Portes’s plan includes
an elementary component. He believes that
an effective elementary school component
must include improved teaching-learning
conditions in the classroom and increased
after-school resources to the child, family,
and community. These activities must in-
volve children in after-school mentoring and
academic clubs. Portes also argues that a
change in the culturing process of schooling
demands that the actions of school personnel
be evaluated and addressed.
Part III:
Transforming the Education
of Educators and Policy Makers
According to Portes, a transformation
in the existing programs in higher educa-
tion that prepare teachers, administrators,
counselors, and policymakers must take
place. For example, he advocates a cultural-
historical approach to the preparation of
educators. This method promotes (a) knowl-
edge of the societal, political, and academic
factors, in and out of school, infl uencing
achievement gaps to emerge and fl ourish in
schools; and, (b) knowledge of human devel-
opment theory and research and life skills;
and, the ability to apply this information
in a culturally inclusive teaching-learning
process responsive to SPARs.
Portes, believing that “substantial
changes” must be made in the ways schools
are designed and organized, concludes with
policy recommendations. One of his sug-
gestions focuses on the ways institutions
of higher education prepare teachers, ad-
ministrators, counselors, and other school
personnel. He argues that we must identify
a common knowledge base and strategic
plan that is shared in the academy. Finally,
he cautions that “more of the same” will not
be enough, if we are serious about improv-
ing schooling conditions for those who are
most underserved.
Discussion
Clearly, understanding the role of
ethnicity in the human developmental
process may be key to conceptualizing ways
to improve the teaching-learning process
in ways that minimize or eliminate the
growing achievement gap among diverse
groups of children. Understandings of
ethnic identity formation and development
(of self and others) and its relationship to
achievement outcomes may be central to
changing classroom and school practices.
In Dismantling Educational Inequity:
A Cultural-Historical Approach to Closing
the Achievement Gap, Portes provides a
multi-level, policy-orientated framework
that explicitly acknowledges students’
socialization process, in and out of school,
to understand how identity development,
which includes ethnicity as a critical vari-
able, impacts achievement outcomes.
This text presents a clear, contex-
tual, operational defi nition of the construct
achievement gap. Portes advances under-
standings of the factors, in and out of school,
that contribute to the lack of academic
success by many children, especially eco-
nomically poor children with membership
in ethnic minority groups. This is a major
contribution to the scholarship because
this foundation can help educators frame
the issues facing children who are the least
advantaged
Portes discusses some of the limita-
tions inherent in the ways educators have
attempted to address the achievement gap.
For example, specifi c programs such as
Upward Bound, AVID, and Gear Up, have
focused on a select few. Also, preventive
actions, such as Head Start, created to
improve early learning of SPARs, service
only a small number of eligible children;
and these programs, as currently designed,
have negligible long-term results.
Portes maintains that these efforts,
while benefi cial to some children, seem to
center on “raising performance rather than
reducing the achievement gap” (p. 73). Ac-
cording to Portes, we must acknowledge
and address the challenge of creating,
implementing, and sustaining schooling
conditions that serve the needs of the mas-
sive numbers of SPARs who are currently
marginalized and underserved in schools.
Additionally, Portes points out that
serious problems in the schooling process,
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION
60
Multicultural Reviews
such as tracking, and the possible elimina-
tion of these practices, may not necessarily
result in improved learning conditions for
the most affected students.
While he concedes that current tracking
practices in schools create learning conditions
for SPARs that place them at risk for learn-
ing, merely untracking may not be a viable
solution. He argues that “the system needs to
be untracked, rather than the students.” That
is, we need culturally-historically framed
changes in (a) the ways we prepare teach-
ers, counselors, and administrators, (b) the
curricular content, and (c) the instructional
process and context in classrooms.
This book provides a conceptual
framework, grounded in the cultural-his-
torical infl uences in human developmental
process, for understanding the achieve-
ment gap. While pointing out flaws in
the educational system and describing
the inequitable out of school conditions
experienced by children who live in pov-
erty, Portes also identifi es and describes
possible solutions for improving schooling
opportunities. He reminds us that achieve-
ment outcomes and equitable conditions in
schooling must not be based on skin color,
ethnic background, or on the economic sta-
tus of one’s parents. This groundbreaking
book, grounded in scholarship, is written in
a straight-forward and engaging format. It
is a ‘must read’ and ‘must have’ book in the
minds and libraries of educators seriously
concerned with reducing and eventually
eliminating the achievement gap.
References
Goodwin, L. (2002). Low teacher expectation
for children of color. Journal of Thought,
37(4), 83-104.
Johnson, R. C., & Viadero, D. (2000). Unmet
promise: Raising minority achievement.
Education Week, 1-10. Retrieved from http:/
www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory. cfm?slug=27
pagintro.h10
Madaus, G., & Clarke, M. (2001). The adverse
impact of high-stakes testing on minority
students: Evidence from one hundred years
of test data. In G. Orfi eld & M. Kornhaber
(Eds.), Raising standards or barriers? In-
equality and high stakes testing in public
education (pp. 85-106). New York: Century
Foundation.
Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. (Eds.). (2001).
Raising standards or barriers? Inequality
and high stakes testing in public education.
New York: Century Foundation.
Portes, P. R. (1996). Ethnicity and culture in
educational psychology. In D. C. Berliner & R.
C. Calfee (Eds.), The handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 331-357). New York: Simon,
Schuster, Macmillan.
Portes, P. R. (2005). Dismantling Educational
Inequality: A Critical-Historical Approach
to Closing the Achievement Gap. New York:
Peter Lang.
Sheets, R. H. (2005). Diversity pedagogy: Exam-
ining the role of culture in the teaching-learn-
ing process. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
—Rose Hernandez Sheets is
an associate professor
with Department of Curriculum and Instruction
in the College of Education
at Texas Tech University,
Lubbock, Texas.
**Screenshot_20261019_100401_Canvas.jpg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/screenshot-20261019-100401-canvas-jpg)