A Letter from the President

by Barbara Garvin-Kester

It is hard not to notice the recent flurry of articles and research reports that have filled our mail and email boxes on the subject of the persistent achievement gap in our nation’s schools and what needs to be done about it. At Core Knowledge, narrowing this gap and achieving social equity have been our focus since the day our founder, E. D. Hirsch, Jr., created our mission and organization. The new buzz only strengthens our commitment to social equity and our resolve to eradicate the gap in student achievement. I am encouraged to find that in a number of communities across the nation, including our own hometown, Charlottesville, Virginia, neighborhood forums are gathering to talk about the achievement gap and to define what parents, businesspeople, elected officials and community leaders might do to ensure that all children have a fair and equal chance to reach their potential.

These community groups are targeting home and school factors that research shows are tied directly to student achievement. Low-income and minority children are at a disadvantage with regard to each factor. However, as community groups explore the gap and develop plans for action, their emphasis has been primarily on what can be done to improve the home environment. There is little discussion or planning to improve schools factors: a rigorous curriculum; high teacher expectations; experienced, well-prepared teachers; better attendance; optimal class size; technology-assisted instruction; and school safety. Both school and non-school factors underlie the achievement gap, and any attempt to close the gap must address both.

Teachers and leaders of Core Knowledge schools know what our research also substantiates — that implementing a rigorous curriculum not only increases student achievement for both advantaged and disadvantaged children, but also narrows the gap between these two groups. Additionally, it sets higher expectations, requires better teacher preparation and experience, improves student attendance, decreases suspensions and discipline problems, and creates a home-school connection that affects home factors. Parents are more available and participate more in school activities, and they are more apt to monitor television watching and to read to their children at home. Adopting a rigorous curriculum can even affect student mobility when the adoption is done districtwide. Dealing with both school and home factors narrows the gap on two fronts. Curriculum reform becomes the center of all other education reforms, acting as a hub to which all the spokes of the wheel are attached.

A rigorous curriculum promotes high expectations. Providing equal access to this kind of curriculum and to these types of expectations ensures that our schools are not shortchanging minority and low-income students. When all students have the opportunity to study a mainstream, undiluted curriculum with highly trained teachers, performance improves because all students have the chance to learn the same challenging curriculum marked by high standards and expectations.

Critics of rigorous curricula suggest that teaching rich academic content in lower grades favors those who are already privileged because strategies that work for upper-middle-class students do not work with students who lack a supportive home environment. The flaw in this logic is that teaching strategies and curriculum content are distinct. Different strategies are needed to teach the same content to children with different ability levels and background knowledge. Teaching strategies are not dependent on content. For children whose parents do not read to them, take them on enrichment excursions, and talk with them to build vocabulary, the school is in fact their only opportunity for these developmental experiences. If we are to reverse the great knowledge deficit that exists today in our learning institutions, educators must accept that filling this void is a role and responsibility that belongs to our schools. Diane Ravitch concludes in her remarkable book Left Back that “a society that tolerates anti-intellectualism in its schools can expect to have a dumbed-down culture that honors celebrity and sensation rather than knowledge and wisdom.” A dumbed-down culture stems from low expectations and lack of access to knowledge. Equal access to knowledge is our desired end; the Core Knowledge curriculum is our best means to that end.