Groenke > Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing

Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing: Using the Equity Audit in Practitioner Inquiry to Rethink Inequity in Public Schools
Susan L. Groenke

1980s in Lumbertona small, rural town in Robeson County, North Carolina. A truly multiracial county, situated in the southeastern portion of the state, Robeson County is home to the ninth-largest non-reservation population of American Indiansthe Lumbeesin the United States. The Lumbee Indians are the largest racial/ethnic group in the county, followed by whites and African Americans.1 At the public schools I attended in Robeson County, I sat beside my Lumbee and African American peers in homeroom and the cafeteria, and I cheered beside them at football games. But I saw few of them in the advanced courses I took. I dont remember how I justified this then. Did I think they didnt work as hard as me? They were lazy? They didnt care? Maybe I believed it was somehow their fault they didnt have the same opportunities as me. When the school day ended, wed segregate againme heading north to the suburbs, far away from South Lumberton and the Turner Terrace housing projects where many of my African American friends lived. I didnt question this set-up too loudly at home; race, meritocracy, poverty, segregation, (in)differencethese werent dinner-table topics at my house when I was growing up. (Maybe I was trying to change something I couldnt even name yet when Id ask my mom to drive me back to Turner Terrace on weekends to hang out with my girlfriends.) My junior year in high school, I moved with my father to a university town, Blacksburg, in southwest Virginia. At the public high school I attended there, I saw no African Americans and no American Indians. Instead, there were affluent white students and Asian studentssons and daughters of

grew up white, middle class, and privileged in the mid-1970s/early

English Education, October 2010

83

Copyright 2010 by the National Council of Teachers of English. All rights reserved.

English Education, V43 N1, October 2010

professors at the universityand Advanced Placement (AP) coursessomething I had never heard of. AP courses hadnt been offered at the rural high school Id attended in Lumberton. When the guidance counselor told me what they wereand I could earn college credit with them if I passed the AP examsI was flabbergasted. Why hadnt this opportunity been available to me in Lumberton? I promptly registered for AP English and AP history courses (my two favorite and strongest subjects) and then promptly began to fail. I wasnt prepared for the rigor the AP courses required. I soon realized how shoddy my academic preparation in Lumberton had been and quietly wondered what my former teachers expectations of, and hopes for, me had been. And again, what about my African American and American Indian peers, who hadnt populated the advanced courses that were offered? What did their teachers expect of them? I open with these reflections to make a point that is central to the work I now do in preparing beginning English teachers to work for social change and social justice in public schools: Educational equity is about much Educational equity is about much more than more than individual achievement. individual achievement. As anti-racist activist Tim Wise (2005) explains, The color of our skin means something (viii), as does how much (or how little) money our parents make and, consequently, where we live and go to school. Current policymakers would have us believe differently. NCLBdespite proposed changes to the law by the current Obama administrationcontinues to rest on the premise that American students must achieve to compete in a global economy, and common standards and standardized testing are the only way to ensure achievement by all students, including students of color and those living in poverty (Hursh, 2005). As many education policy researchers have noted, however, in the name of achievement and equity-minded reform, students attending high-minority/high-poverty schools continue to get left behind: Low-performing public schools (usually high-minority/ high-poverty) have been shut down or restructured as charter schools; students (predominantly African American and Latino/Latina, predominantly poor) who fail standardized tests have been abandoned in remedial or special education courses where they receive test prep drilling that lowers academic expectations and reduces student morale; and students who have been repeatedly retained (predominantly African American and Latino/Latina, predominantly poor) have dropped out or been pushed out of schools (Amrein & Berliner, 2002; Apple, 1998; Au, 2009; Craig, 2004; Elmore, 2002; Hursh, 2005; Madaus & Clarke, 2001; McNeil, 2000; Oakes, 1993; Orfield &

84

Groenke > Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing

Lee, 2005; Perna & Thomas, 2009; Popekewitz, 2000; Sloan, 2007; Trueba, 1989; Ullucci & Spencer, 2008; Valencia, 1997). Menken (2009) explains the consequences of NCLB have had the most deleterious effects on English Language Learners (ELLs), the fastest growing population in U.S. schools. In addition, critical race theorists (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Solrzano & Ornelas, 2002) explain that African American and Latino/ Latina students continue to be disproportionately underrepresented in advanced courses in schools across districts, and schools serving urban, low-income communities tend to have low student enrollment in advanced classes. Deyhle (1995) and Brayboy (2006) describe the problems American Indians encounter in public schools, including, but certainly not limited to, the white supremacist canon of literary classics students must read (e.g., Shakespeare), as well as school policies supporting the offensive use of Native mascots (Castagno & Lee, 2007). (At Blacksburg High School, we were the Indians.)2 Despite these vigorous criticisms of current education policies and public school practices, teachers often do not have a clear understanding of the degree of inequity in their own schools and districts. When poor, minority students do not perform well on accountability measures, teachers and school administrators often cite factors external to schooling (e.g., childrens parents, their home lives, their communities, and even their genetics) as cause, or the students themselves (something internally wrong with them), rather than the institution of schoolingthe assumptions, beliefs, practices, procedures, and policies of schools. As a result, educators can say they have no responsibility in educational inequity (Valencia, 1997). Too, discussions of race, poverty, and opportunity as factors in inequitable school outcomes are routinely avoided in schools (Pollock, 2001; Scherff & Piazza, 2008/2009; Tatum, 2007). And, as Skrla, Scheurich, Garcia, and Nolly (2004) suggest, even when teachers and administrators are aware of inequities in their schools, they rarely systematically examine and devise ways to eliminate them.

Rethinking Equity as Structural and Systemic Opportunities

In contrast to the empty equity rhetoric used by federal policymakers to push dangerous neoliberal agendas, and the problematic ways this rhetoric shapes teachers and administrators work in schools, true educational equity interrogates institutional racism and classism (among other isms) and strives to provide equitable access to rich, high-quality educational opportunities for all students, not just a select, privileged few. Darling-Hammond

85

English Education, V43 N1, October 2010

(2009/2010) suggests the achievement gap cannot be closed until the yawning opportunity gap in educational resources (e.g., school funding, equitable distribution of school resources) is addressed (p. 8) and explains that many of the sources of problems in failing schools are structural and systemic (p. 14). Likewise, Scherff and Piazza (2008/2009) revisit the 1960s concept of opportunity to learn to trouble the notion that opportunity is an individual student phenomenon; rather, they say, it is a collective and systemic issue: Students attend schools in highly politicized systems and, depending on the sociopolitical systems of which they are a part, are afforded greater or fewer choices and options regarding what they learn (p. 346). By way of contrast, a true equal opportunity educational system would habitually operate to ensure that every learnerin whatever learning environment that learner is foundhas the greatest opportunity to learn enhanced by the resources and supports necessary to achieve competence, excellence, independence, responsibility, and self-sufficiency for school and for life (Scott qtd. in Skrla, Scheurich, Garcia, & Nolly, 2004, p. 137). To bring about such environments, teachers and school leaders must learn to see and inquire about existing inequities in schools and, ultimately, work to eliminate them.

Learning to See and Inquire about Inequity

In Letters to a Young Teacher, Jonathan Kozol (2007) describes the need for teachers to speak out as witnesses to the injustices they see each day in public schools (p. 93). But sometimes beginning teachers need help learning to see injustices, as well as in making sense of the sociopolitical systems of which schooling is a part. Or, as in my own experience, some beginning teachers may see educational inequity but not have the words or language to name it, describe it, critique it, and thus work to change it. Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan L. Lytle (2001) talk about inquiry as stance (p. 46) as a theoretical positioning of the teaching self to be a reflective practitioner. Such a stance entails critique and transformation as well as a commitment not only to high standards for the learning of all students but also to social change and social justice and to the individual and collective professional growth of teachers (p. 46). I understand practitioner inquiry in teacher education as a means to prepare teachers to be democratic school leaders who (1) have comprehensive, insightful understandings of equity and inequity relationships; (2) can critically question current accountability policy, and (3) work for true equity-positive outcomes in their local school contexts. To do so, beginning

86

Groenke > Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing

teachers need strategies and tools with which to successfully accomplish this work. The equity audit is one such tool (see Appendix A). In this article I describe the equity audit and its implementation in the action research course I teach in hopes that other teacher educators might find it a useful tool for their own equity-minded work with beginning teachers.

The Equity Audit: A Starting Point for Practitioner Inquiry

As Skrla et al. (2004) explain, the equity audit has its origins in the civil rights movement, where it was conducted by school districts (either voluntarily or under pressure by civic activists or ordered by the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights) as a way of determining the degree of compliance with a number of civil rights statutes that prohibit discrimination in educational programs and activities receiving federal funding. School administrators have continued to use them as part of state school reform and accountability efforts. Traditionally, equity audits have been extensive, 200300 page reports, but Skrla et al. (2004) offer suggestions for paring their focus down to 12 indicators grouped into three categories: teacher quality equity; programmatic equity, and achievement equity. Skrla et al. explain that these categories and indicators closely match state accountability systems. For the purposes of my action research instruction, I blend Skrla et al.s indicators with categories and questions provided in Frattura and Cappers (2007) equity audit (see Appendix A). I like Frattura and Cappers version because it highlights data that federal, district, and state monitoring does not typically require, such as student representation in particular programs (e.g., at-risk, gifted, advanced placement) and the percentage of students in special education receiving free and reduced-price lunches. Frattura and Cappers equity audit also encourages data collectors to discuss problems that exist with such phrases as, I dont even see the persons color, and But I do not have, or have very few, students of color in our school/district, so race isnt an issue here (see Appendix A).

Implementing the Equity Audit

The action research course I teach to beginning English teachers is a twosemester course that students in the program are required to take. In the fall semester, when students begin their yearlong internship in a local school, they take the first course, which serves as an introduction to practitioner inquiry for social justice. In this fall course, students are told about the course expectations, namely that they will select a topic for in-depth

87

English Education, V43 N1, October 2010

inquiry and conduct a literature review on the topic. In the spring course, students design a study to be carried out at their schools, analyze data from the study, and report findings in a paper that serves as their master thesis. In addition, students present their research at a Capstone Conference held on campus in the spring. When I introduce the equity audit to the students in the fall course, I explain that the equity audit may serve as a catalyst for the research studies they will eventually complete. I encourage them to consider the data they find through the equity audit as topics to pursue in their action research projects. I give the students several weeks to complete the audits at their internship schools and then ask them to present their data to the class. As each school team or individual student presents, we graph the findings on chart paper for each school. After each presentation, the students then discuss the findingsWhat did you learn? What did you find surprising?considering the similarities among and differences across schools within the same school district.

What Happens When Beginning Teachers Conduct Equity Audits?

As a result of conducting the equity audits, the beginning teachers begin to consider reasons why teachers understandings of the degree of inequity in schools are often unclear, and consider how obfuscation of such data helps perpetuate the status quo. Several of the beginning teachers often express frustration that some data are not easy to get, As a result of conducting the eq- either because the state doesnt collect them (and uity audits, the beginning teach- thus neither does the school) and/or school-level ers begin to consider reasons staff are suspicious of the student interns aims. why teachers understandings of This leads them to understand that their schools the degree of inequity in schools either arent collecting similar equity data (and are often unclear, and consider why not?) or dont want them to get it (again, how obfuscation of such data why not?). The beginning teachers are often surprised helps perpetuate the status quo. at the differences in numbers of students in AP courses between schools in the same school district. Conversation about these numbers in one class evolved into discussion about why no AP classes were offered at the more rural high school in the district. One beginning teacher asked, Are kids at the rural high school told to do vocational education, or is that their choice? Do they feel like they have choices? Do they know AP courses exist? Do they just not expect to go to college? I feel confident the beginning teacher was consideringpossibly for the first timethe expecta-

88

Groenke > Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing

tions teachers and school culture hold for students, how these expectations are communicated in school practice, and the notion of individual student choice. I encouraged this teacher to consider how some expectations for students can come to appear normal for some, but not others.3 Another beginning teacher discovered that all the English Language Learners (ELLs) in our district were sent to one school, where district ELL resources are concentrated. When she discovered the home ELL school was one of the poorer, understaffed district schools struggling to meet adequately yearly progress (AYP), she grew angry and considered conducting her action research project around questions about how such decisions about ELL students are made and what the consequences of such decisions are on ELL students and their families. Still another student, Jessica, realized through the equity audit conducted at her school that the school faculty included no persons of color. The student body was predominantly white and predominantly working- to middle-class. Jessica responded passionately in one of our class discussions about the equity audit statement, But I do not have, or have very few, students of color in our school/district, so race isnt an issue here. She explained that she had had an experience during her first full week as an intern that made her realize race was an issue at her school, despite the low percentage of minority students and no faculty of color. She explained that her students had read Barbara Kingsolvers The Bean Trees over the summer and were expected on return to school to present short, in-class presentations on racism and immigrationkey issues in the novel. Jessica wasnt prepared for the ideas and beliefs her students communicated in their presentations: Racism is an old issue; Racism isnt my problem; Immigrants take all our jobs and should just leave the country. Jessica wrote in her teacher research journal:
Did everyone in the class agree that the world is constructed of us and them? Who are these Others which students unconsciously label, and how have the students in this rural high school come to construct their views and understanding of the Others? Does empathy exist for other cultures and ethnicities, and how does it existis it only a classroom construct? (Eshbaugh, 2008)

Rather than ignore her students inaccurate, myth-based perceptions of immigrant workers and racism as a non-issue, she saw an opportunity through her own inquiry project to further consider her students beliefs and implement multicultural literature instruction that might encourage her students to reconsider their beliefs. In her final Capstone paper, Jessica wrote this about the inquiry process:

89

English Education, V43 N1, October 2010

Reflection has been a close companion during this teacher-inquiry research processI have reflected on my students experience and my own experience as a preservice teacher. I know that I have grown in my own understanding and perceptions of students because of this experience. The reactions and interactions I observed during this novel study lead me to believe that students want to be educated, not only in measurable academic terms, but in their perspectives of the world. As a result, I listen more to what students are saying and asking for, and I talk less. Students are asking for texts that are relevant, authentic, and controversial. So, I feel encouraged by my findings and ready to take on another novel study with a multicultural graphic novel. Only this time, I have outgrown the title of preservice teacher, and am ready and equipped to leave the protective covering of my internship and go out into the world and listen to students. (Eshbaugh, 2008)

One criticism of NCLB has been that reading instruction has been increasingly narrowed and scripted, leaving little room for students critical thinking and personal exploration through the extended study of quality literature (Altwerger et al., 2004; Hursh, 2005). Jessicas study provides yet more evidence that increasingly narrowed curriculum works against the development of skills crucial to citizenship and democracy. Finally, another student, Austin, was motivated by the equity audit to pay attention to student tracking at his internship school. He reflected in his teacher journal, I feel that Honors students are constructed to believe in themselves to a much higher degree in other students (Duck, 2009). Austin went on to do a Bourdieuian-framed interview-study of 11th-grade Honorslevel students and their teacher and found that the students perceived themselves as a class separated from other ability groups in the school, endowed as special through certain kinds of privileges, the class environment itself, and validation from the teacher (Duck, 2009). Austin also found that teacher perceptions of student ability played a major role in student performance, and the students justified their separate class status because they felt they were smarter . . . than their peers (Duck, 2009). Austins inquiry led him to consider how ability grouping is possible in a democratic education system that supposedly rewards individual achievement. He wrote in his final Capstone paper: The mere fact that Honors students are observably receiving exclusive symbolic capital is suggestive of a need to either 1) do away with ability groups in schools, or 2) provide non-Honors students with the same capital opportunities as Honors students (Duck, 2009). As a result of his findings, Austin made changes in his own instructional style in his non-Honors classes (e.g., using more discussion-based teaching).

90

Groenke > Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing

Conclusion
Ultimately, I encourage beginning teachers to consider the wonderings and felt difficulties (Dana & Yendol-Silva, 2003) that emerge from the equity audits and our conversations in class as questions to guide their own teacher inquiry. I know, through the conversations and inquiry projects that ensue, that the equity audits raise the consciousness of the beginning English teachers. They begin to see how inequityin the names of reform and achievementoperates in schools; they begin to feel empowered to examine inequities and ultimately critique them. Perhaps more importantly, the beginning teachers begin to see how practitioner inquiry can be a kind of witnessing (Kozol, 2007) as they come to view themselves as potential school leaders and change agents, striving to change inequitable school practices.

Appendix A: Equity Audit

General Data Report fraction and percentage of each as applicable 1. Number of students in your district: 2. Number of students in your school: 3. Number of staff in your school (certified and noncertified): 4. How many teachers in your school teach outside of their content/expertise area? 5. How many teachers in your school hold (a) bachelors degrees; (b) masters degrees; (c) doctoral degrees? 6. How many teachers in your school have been teaching (a) 15 years; (b) 615 years; (c) 1520 years; (d) more than 20 years? 7. What is the teacher mobility/attrition rate at your school? 8. Who teaches advanced classes at your school? Long-time teachers or beginning teachers? Who teaches lower-track classes? Who teaches seniors? Ninth graders? 9. Number of students who transferred or moved into the school the last academic year (disaggregate by race, disability, gender, ELL, and free/reduced-price lunch): 10. Students who transferred out of the school in the last academic year (disaggregate using above info): 11. Fraction and percentage of staff in your school who are associated with student services (e.g., special education, counselors, nurses, bilingual specialists, reading specialists, literacy coaches, etc.): Status of Labeling at Your School (Report total number [fraction] and percentage) 1. Students labeled gifted in your school: 2. Students labeled at-risk in your school: 3. Students labeled with a disability in your school: 4. Students labeled ESL, ELL, or bilingual in your school:

91

English Education, V43 N1, October 2010

5. Students with any other kind of label in your school (include the label): 6. Graduation tracks at your school (e.g., basic, advanced, honors, college prep, AP): Discipline Data 1. Students who were suspended in the past year (disaggregate by gender, race, disability, free/reduced-price lunch, ELL; divide into in-school and out-of-school suspensions): 2. Students who were expelled in the past year (disaggregate using above info): 3. Students who were placed in alternative school setting (disaggregate using above info): 4. Low attendance and/or truancy (disaggregate by race, free/reduced-price lunch, ELL, disability, and gender): 5. Other relevant discipline data: General Achievement Data 1. Eighth-grade achievement (disaggregate by race, free/reduced-price lunch, ELL, disability, gender): 2. Tenth-grade achievement (disaggregate using above info): 3. Graduation rate (disaggregate using above info): 4. Graduated with an advanced/academic diploma (disaggregate using above info): 5. Drop-out rate (disaggregate using above info): 6. Participation in ACT, SAT, AP courses/exams (disaggregate using above info): 7. Test results of ACT, SAT, AP exams (disaggregate using above info): Social Class Data 1. Students receiving free and reduced-price lunches in your school: 2. Students receiving free/reduced-price lunches in other schools in your district at the same level: 3. Students identified for special education in your school: 4. Of the number of students identified for special education, what fraction and what percentage receive free/reduced-price lunches? 5. How does the response to Item 4 compare to Item 1? The answers should be similar. If, for example, 60% of students identified for special education also qualify for free/reducedprice lunches, and your school has 20% of students receiving free/reduced-price lunches, students who receive free/reduced-price lunches are overrepresented in special education. Further, this means that, in this setting, if a student is from a lower socioeconomic class family, he or she is three times more likely to be labeled for special education than other students. What social class myths support these data? 6. Students labeled as gifted in your setting who receive free/reduced-price lunches. Compare with Item 1. 7. Students identified as at-risk who receive free/reduced-price lunches. Compare with Item 1. 8. Reflect: What do these social class data mean to you? What curriculum, programs, resources, etc., are available at your school for students of lower social classes? What ideas do you have for remedying weaknesses that exist in these programs? Race and Ethnicity Data and Analysis 1. Students of color in your school: How does this compare with other schools in your district?

92

Groenke > Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing

2. Students of color in the total district: 3. Of the number of students labeled for special education, what fraction and percentage are students of color? 4. How does this number and percentage compare with those in Item 1? 5. How many students of color are labeled at-risk? 6. How many students of color are labeled gifted? 7. Total certified staff who are people of color in your school. Compare with response to Item 1. 8. People of color serving on the school board: 9. Report two pieces of academic achievement data (reading and math) as they relate to this area of diversity: 10. Reflect: Discuss the problems with the phrases I dont even see the persons color and But I do not have, or have very few, students of color in our school/district, so race isnt an issue here. English Language Learners (ELL) and Bilingual Data 1. How many English language learners are in your school and what languages do they speak? How does this compare to other schools in your district? 2. How many English language learners in the total district? 3. How many ELL students are labeled for special education? 4. How many ELL students are labeled at-risk? 5. How many ELL students are labeled gifted? 6. What is the ELL service delivery model at your school? Are ELL students receiving quality instruction with certified teachers, or are they being warehoused? 7. What is the total number of certified bilingual staff at your school? 8. Bilingual people on school board: 9. Report two pieces of academic achievement data (reading and math) as they relate to this area of diversity: (Dis)Ability Data 1. Number of students labeled with (dis)abilities in your school: 2. How does this number compare with district total? 3. Number of special education referrals a year: 4. Report two pieces of academic achievement data (reading and math) as they relate to (dis) ability: Gender Data 1. Females on the teaching staff at your school: 2. Females teaching science/math classes: 3. Females teaching English: 4. Females teaching history: 5. Females teaching at the highest level of math: 6. Females teaching AP courses:

93

English Education, V43 N1, October 2010

7. Out-of-school suspensions/expulsions by gender: 8. Females/males on administrative team: 9. Females on school board: 10. Report two pieces of academic achievement data (reading and math) as they relate to this area of diversity: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity 1. Does your district have any active policies that address sexual orientation and gender identity? 2. How and to what extent does your districts curriculum provide instruction related to sexual orientation and gender identity? 3. Does your school have a Gay/Straight Alliance? If not, why not? 4. Assess your schools library/media holdings related to sexual orientation and gender identity. 5. To what extent has professional development addressed sexual orientation and gender identity? 6. To what extent are students teased or called names because of their gender identity or sexual orientation at your school? How do you know? Note: Modified from Skrla et al. (2004) and Frattura and Capper (2007).

Notes
1. Since 1888 the Lumbee Tribe has sought full federal recognition from the U.S. Government. When an Indian tribe is federally recognized, the U.S. Government recognizes the right of the tribe to self-government and tribal sovereignty. In 1956, Congress passed the Lumbee Act, which recognized the tribe as Indian. However, the Act withheld the full benefits of federal recognition from the tribe. Efforts are currently underway to pass federal legislation that grants full recognition to the Lumbee Tribe. 2. In 1999 the United Coalition for American Indian Concerns contacted the Montgomery County school board and asked that Blacksburg High School stop using the symbol. In 2001 the school board approved a new rule that prohibited any race, religion, ethnicity, or nationality from being used as a mascot and made the decision to drop the schools Indian mascot. 3. I also encourage students interested in the history of vocational education and the existing dichotomy between blue collar and white collar schooling to read Mike Roses (2005) excellent book, The Mind at Work: Valuing the Intelligence of the American Worker.

References
Altwerger, B., Arya, P., Jin, L., Jordan, N. L., Laster B., Martens, P., et al. (2004). When research and mandates collide: The challenges and dilemmas of teacher education in the era of NCLB. English Education, 36(2), 119133. Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). An analysis of some unintended consequences and negative consequences of high-stakes testing. East Lansing, MI: Great Lakes Center on Education Research and Practice.

94

Groenke > Seeing, Inquiring, Witnessing

Apple, M. W. (1998). Are markets and standards democratic? Educational Researcher, 27(6), 2429. Au, W. (2009). Social studies, social justice: W(h)ither the social studies in highstakes testing? Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(1), 4358. Brayboy, B. M. J. (2006). Toward a tribal critical race theory in education. The Urban Review, 37(5), 425446. Castagno, A., & Lee, S. J. (2007). Native mascots and ethnic fraud in higher education: Using tribal critical race theory and the interest convergence principle as an analytic tool. Equity & Excellence in Education, 40, 313. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2001). Beyond certainty: Taking an inquiry stance on practice. In A. Lieberman & L. Miller (Eds.), Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters (pp. 4558). New York: Teachers College Press. Craig, C. J. (2004). The dragon in school backyards: The influence of mandated testing on school contexts and educators narrative knowing. Teachers College Record, 106, 12291257. Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Silva, D. (2003). The reflective educators guide to classroom research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Darling-Hammond, L. (2009/2010). Americas commitment to equity will determine our future. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(4), 814. Deyhle, D. (1995). Navajo youth and Anglo racism: Cultural integrity and resistance. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 403444. Duck, A. (2009). Money in the bank: An analysis of symbolic capital in an honors English classroom. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Elmore, R. F. (2002). Testing trap. Harvard Magazine, 105(1), 35. Eshbaugh, J. (2008). Reactions and interactions: Student encounters with the multicultural graphic novel Persepolis. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Frattura, E. M., & Capper, C. A. (2007). Leading for social justice: Transforming schools for all learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Hursh, D. (2005). The growth of high-stakes testing in the USA: Accountability, markets and the decline in educational equality. British Educational Research Journal, 31(5), 605622. Kozol, J. (2007). Letters to a young teacher. New York: Crown. Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97, 4768. Madaus, G., & Clarke, M. (2001). The adverse impact of high stakes testing on minority students: Evidence from 100 years of test data. In C. Orfield & M. Kornhaber (Eds.), Raising standards or raising barriers? Inequality and high-stakes testing in publication (pp. 85106). New York: Century Foundation. McNeil, L. M. (2000). Contradictions of school reform: Educational costs of standardized testing. New York: Routledge. Menken, K. (2009). Policy failures: NCLB and English language learners. In S. L. Groenke & J. A. Hatch (Eds.), Critical pedagogy and teacher education in the neoliberal era (pp. 4962). New York: Springer.

95

English Education, V43 N1, October 2010

Oakes, J. (1993). Tracking, inequality, and the rhetoric of reform: Why schools dont change. In H. S. Shapiro & D. E. Purpel (Eds.), Critical social issues in American education (pp. 85101). White Plains, NY: Longman. Orfield, G., & Lee, C. (2005). Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Perna, L. W., & Thomas, S. L. (2009). Barriers to college opportunity: The unintended consequences of state-mandated testing. Educational Policy, 23(3), 451479. Pollock, M. (2001). How the question I ask most about race in education is the very question I most suppress. Educational Researcher, 30(9), 212. Popekewitz, T. S. (2000). The denial of change in educational change: Systems of ideas in the construction of national policy and evaluation. Educational Researcher, 29(1), 1729. Rose, M. (2005). The mind at work: Valuing the intelligence of the American worker. New York: Penguin. Scherff, L., & Piazza, C. (2008/2009). Why now, more than ever, we need to talk about opportunity to learn. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(4), 343352. Skrla, L., Scheurich, J. J., Garcia, J., & Nolly, G. (2004). Equity audits: A practical leadership tool for developing equitable and excellent schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 133161. Sloan, K. (2007). High-stakes accountability, minority youth, and ethnography: Assessing the multiple effects. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 38(1), 2441. Solrzano, D. G., & Ornelas, A. (2002). A critical race analysis of Advanced Placement classes: A case of educational inequality. Journal of Latinos and Education, 1(4), 215229. Tatum, B. (2007). Can I talk about race? And other conversations in an era of school resegregation. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Trueba, H. T. (1989). Rethinking dropouts: Culture and literacy for minority empowerment. In H. T. Trueba, G. Spindler, & L. Spindler (Eds.), What do anthropologists have to say about dropouts? (pp. 2742). London: Falmer. Ullucci, K., & Spencer, J. (2009). Unraveling the myths of accountability: A case study of the California high school exit exam. Urban Review, 41, 161173. Valencia, R. R. (1997). The evolution of deficit thinking. London: Falmer. Wise, T. (2005). White like me: Reflections on race from a privileged son. Brooklyn, NY: Soft Skull Press.

Susan L. Groenke is associate professor of English education at the University

of Tennessee, where she teaches courses on young adult literature, English methods, and social justice-oriented action research. She is the co-editor (with Amos Hatch) of Small Openings: Critical Pedagogy and Teacher Education in the Neoliberal Era.

96