actin' revisited

i finally got around to reading fryer...i can see the utility of his basic premise...i will need to revisit the scope of policy implications - but his basic observation of the data could be interesting - it's the interpretation that is likely to be problematic for the following reasons:

Roland Fryer, Harvard professor, recently authored an empirical analysis of a "phenomenon" referred to as "acting white." In a nutshell, here it is...in integrated schools with large white majorities, black students receive two "signals" about behavior. The first signal is that academic success will "beget labor market success." The second signal is that behaviors associated with "acting white" will "induce peer rejection." The result, then, is that "racial differences in the relationship between peer group acceptance and academic achievement will exist and these differences will be exacerbated in arenas that foster more interracial contact or increased mobility..."

That sounds fairly straightforward. There are, however, a number of problems occasioned by the context of the discussion. Here is a partial list of some of the problems:

1) the author presumes to be contributing to "the racial achievement gap in education." the problem with this statement is that he does not define any of his terms...for example, if blacks are a race and whites are a race, then would the superior academic performance of African girls (better than white boys) in England serve as part of what Fryer terms "a vexing reality." If Asians are a race would their academic performance on a level that exceeds whites also be part of that vexing reality. If we are strictly talking the "achievement" of black students in the US, are we still talking about race - or are we talking about a national issue?

2) Achievement is not defined. Achievement occurs in many areas...for example, beyond the context of schools, black youth have created or redefined a number of multibillion dollar industries in the US since 1970. Music, film, fashion and professional athletics are three areas which have changed tremendously. The "racial achievement gap" in these areas might also be viewed as a vexing reality - depending on your perspective.

3) the author assumes that white Americans are not part of an anti-intellectual culture - but the data rejects this assumption...while the measures of popularity in public schools for white students suggest a correlation between achievement and popularity - take a look at the private school findings. the most popular white students in private schools have a gpa around 2.0...as a graduate of an elite private school, i can say this squares with my experience (the wealthiest kids were often the least inspired, most drugged out cats on campus)...moreover, the anti-intellectual approach of american's is legendary - check Alexis de Tocqueville or Bertrand Russell...there are some unresolved issues here to say the least.

4) the author admits to using the most narrowly prescriptive definition of "acting white" and admits the data set is not "robust" enough to capture the other elements. big problem - especially since I would maintain that academic achievement is the smallest part of "acting white" and little more than a corollary to behavior and practice.

5) the author uses a bit of intellectual slight of hand in reporting on studies done in previous years. he cites the neal and johnson (1996) study in suggesting that "eliminating the test score gap that exists at labor market entry may be a critical component of reducing racial wage inequality." this may or may not be true. what neal and johnson actually found was that hourly wages between blacks and whites differed by 24-26% without controlling for test scores; the differential decreased to 7-10% after controlling for test scores - BUT, the annual wage gap was 30% - with the control for test scores. so, fryer is a bit disinterested in telling the entire story...

6)the author assumes that students who attend the same schools reside in the same neighborhoods(p.15)...that's crazy...i have lived in new york city, pottstown, pa. and ann arbor, michigan - and spent a great deal of time in DC, Chicago, Syracuse, ny., Philly and numerous other places where students attended integrated schools but DID NOT live in the same neighborhoods. in fact, in this nation's larger schools, it is unlikely that these students live in the same neighborhoods - particularly when "race" is a variable.

that's all for now on this. next...the policy implications.

Comments

[DarkStar]

Re#3: I totally agree.

Re#6: Interesting point that I didn't consider. But what of it?

Re#4: Can you point out where htat was stated. I don't see how I could have missed that one.

[Temple3]

Excuse me, I substituted "robust" for "rich" - same difference - page 6...

"While we are cognizant of the complications and nuances of what is meant by 'acting white,' our data are not rich enough to test many of the plausible definitions."

[Temple3]

The implications of #6 are several. Fryer states, "[b]y comparing students who attend the same school (and likely live in similar neighborhoods), one controls for different grading standards, social norms, and mean popularity levels across schools." (pg. 15)

I don't agree that is necessarily the case. Given the pervasiveness of residential segregation and the recent mobility of the so-called black middle class, I believe these items need to be teased out a bit more...In NYC, students from many zip codes attend the same school and what defines a neighborhood can change with all the suddeness of a flash flood. Two blocks in one direction can signal drastic changes in neighborhoods, mean income, education levels, etc. The same was true when I lived in Ann Arbor. Rich and poor often live quite close to one another and in many locales, attend the same schools - moreover, the tenacity of shared "cultural items" among black folk suggest there are some serious limitations to making this assumption.

Part of my work involves the review of schools across New York state...there are countless schools with enormous gaps in the education, income, wealth, health, etc. between parents. So, it's not clear to me that this serves as an effective "control."