America has equality under the law and larger employers are actively trying to end discrimination in hiring and promotions- so why the persistent failure to close racial attainment gaps in the American economic system? In a phrase, a significant portion of the disparity can be put down to the educational ‘pipeline’ of American style of K-12. First, it's not about money (although there may well be a case for such at the extremes). States which use redistributive policies to focus resources in areas where gaps in attainment are most persistent achieve very little for their money. Second, much as we should value teachers for their commitment to public service, they are not worth their weight in gold. Studies show that the gap between an adequate and an excellent teacher can lead to educational outcomes which are 10% higher. More important is the gap between an adequate teacher and an inadequate one- with outcomes dropping by a precipitous 35%.
Roland Fryer is perhaps better known for his research on policing, both in terms of correcting inaccurate narratives involving police shootings, as well as proving that viral incidents involving police shootings are directly responsible for what has been termed the Ferguson effect. But just as important is previous research he performed on education in Texas. Don't let the argument between charter and regular public schools fool you. What his research really proves is that the absence of inadequate or grossly inadequate teachers, paired with an aspirational environment and structured low-level discipline policies which set the standards high for behaviour can significantly raise academic performance. In these circumstances gaps in performance with standardised tests effectively halved between underperforming minority groups and whites.
But this isn't the only way in which the progressive model of education fails- not to be confused with progressive politics. Child-centred education in which the child 'discovers' knowledge rather than being taught it by a teacher in teacher-led more traditional education, may have some efficacy- but it hugely inefficient by comparison to the spoon-feeding of knowledge. The main reason why progressive teachers complain about teaching for tests in because their inefficient methodology automatically means that there class will fall behind with their curriculum, meaning they need to rush to complete the curriculum content as the semester for tests looms large. Critically, most higher performing non-selective private schools are forced to operate a more traditional approach to education because there ‘brand’ is built upon academic results.
‘Whole word’ has had a disastrous impact on education for the less well advantaged, when not taught alongside the simple innovation of phonics, or 'sounding out' words. To be sure, there is some utility in teaching whole word, for the simple reason that a child may have never encountered a word that appears in a text. But phonics is far better for everyone who is not dyslexic and for 90% to 95% of words a child will encounter when reading. The absence of phonics in many American schools leads to massive advantage to parents with better educational backgrounds, for the simple reason that when they listen to their children read, and begin to lay the foundations of literacy by taking teaching upon themselves, they naturally default to phonics they learned in their own childhood. If we consider that a child receives knowledge from three main sources- their school, their parents and their peer group, then the absence of phonics in a school setting, like so many other aspects of a quality education, only amplifies the advantage of having an upper middle class family (more likely to be white) and highly educated parents.
But ‘progressive’ education is also at fault- it promotes terrible ideas, whilst ignoring scientifically proven ones which could have a huge positive impact. One of the most recent educational myths I've looked into is VARK- the idea that one can separate people by the way they prefer to learn- do you prefer to learn by visual, auditory, reading or kinetic (psychical) means. No doubt there was some hope that these differences in learning preferences might be a potential source of disparity. Not so- although people do possess definable differences in the style of learning which they most prefer, a number of high quality studies have shown that learning-style preference has absolutely no impact of educational attainment or outcomes. You may prefer looking at diagrams and reading text to understand the workings of the internal combustion engine, but if forced to get your hands dirty and take an engine apart (and provided you are learning the same information), you will get exactly the same marks on your course.
We've known exactly how the human brain learns for decades. It's called Cognitive Load Theory, and it explains many of the reasons why two people of equivalent mental ability might perform drastically differently if asked to perform slightly more complex mental maths. Simply put, working memory is puny and we rely upon long-term memory to perform any task beyond the most basic. If you are trying to multiply a two digit number by a two digit number in your head, it is not enough to be able to work out 6 x 9- you have to have the number 54 committed to memory, ingrained in your knowledge store. Otherwise you won't be able to conveniently store this number to one side, whilst working out the rest of the mental maths problem.
This one simple observation has profound implication for the way we learn and the disparities we see. It effects your vocabulary, your ability to construct grammatically correct sentences. Crucially, it has a huge impact on the potential to enjoy reading for pleasure, because if you are constantly struggling with the basics of literacy it makes for a less enjoyable experience, and one in which the larger meaning of the text sails right over your head. But if the question is how much influence does such a profoundly clear understanding of how we learn have on the educational theories proposed by academics in the education field have- the answer is very little.
Here in the UK we have long since instituted Offsted, the inspectorate for schools- which despite its occasional infatuation with progressive educational fads has been extremely effective at remedying or removing inadequate or grossly inadequate teaching within the profession, In recent years, the championing of traditional and academy style education under the auspices of the then Education Secretary Michael Gove has seen PISA scores rise in England and Wales, whilst Scotland- pursuing a more progressive model has continued to see its once proud educational attainment fall. Perhaps the most significant benefit has been a closing of gap in terms of racial disparities in educational attainment, as well as a more specifically defined closing of the gap in terms of IQ- with an entire national school years’ worth of psychometric IQ tests administered to 12 year olds in 2011/2012 showing that the gap had shrunk to 5 or 6 points- more than the 10 point gap reflected in the relative poverty-related Free School Meals data.
But it's not just schools. One of the most persistent and easily definable elements of true systemic racism, relates to the ability of white parents to exclude bad or disruptive influences in the school year and peer group of their children, both within education and socially. Disruptive influences are quickly expelled in a private school environment and this also holds true in pastoral public schools. Often the decision is crouched in the hand-wringing terms of considering that the horrible little monster is finally receiving the specialist help that they need, but ultimately the results are the same- disruptive kids who could potentially be bad influences are systemically removed from the peer groups and schools of middle class and above white children.
Meanwhile, Black kids in the worst parts of the public education system are routinely forced to go to school with other kids who have physically attacked teachers or sexually assaulted students. Under the Obama Administration, evidence of disparity between Blacks and whites in terms of discipline and expulsion rates was seen as evidence of racism- when all the socio-economic and social evidence (as well as subsequent rates of criminal offending) suggested that African Americans would indeed possess higher rates of discipline, suspension and expulsion requirements. This deliberate effort to cut rates of discipline and suspensions has meant an unfolding disaster for Black kids in predominantly African American schools. It only takes modest and continuing disruption in schools to deprive a child of two full years worth of education by the time they leave K-12- and thanks to the perception that disparate discipline is a sign of racism, this disruption will fall most heavily on Black kids.
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos ends a policy that subordinated safety to political correctness. (Article Text)
Here in the UK, we take a different tack. We have pupil referral units which at their best involve one-to-one sports coaching with a boxing instructor. It isn't always successful. Kids referred to pupil referral units in London are 200 times more likely to involved in a knife crime incident, either as a victim or offender. But it's far more preferable in terms of life outcomes than the American system and really does work in a lot of individual cases, because the American system is likely to produce more young men incarcerated in prisons for violent crimes, not fewer- broadening the school-to-prison pipeline to an industrial scale- for the simple reason that mixing prosocial boys with antisocial boys creates more antisocial boys amongst the prosocial group- not the reverse.
So to recap- here in the UK we've eliminated bad teachers. We've removed the worst aspects of the progressive teaching model, or at least partially mitigated them with more traditional elements of education. We have found a more humane way of dealing with disruptive boys, which makes them far less likely to go on to commit crime. As a result most of the differences in educational outcomes and performance have largely evaporated. The Afro Caribbean British cohort lags behind somewhat, but this is because like Bangladeshi British and White Working Class demographics they were exposed to incredibly harmful post-WWII government policies in housing and welfare, so similar to their African American counterparts. More recent African British schoolchildren outperform White British schoolchildren overall, and as a group account for the fact that average pay is equal between Blacks and Whites in the UK, for the 18 to 30 age group. What else? Well it's worth mentioning the experience of Northern Irish Catholics relative to their Protestant counterparts.
If one were to travel back in time, one would find Catholics to be subject to all manner of discriminatory practices in employment. These were removed. But how does a people who generally enjoyed a poorer level of living standard by virtually every socio-economic measure overtake their once wealthier Protestant counterparts in terms of education, wealth and income? With stronger communities, a higher rate of enduring stable family formation and two parent families who have the options provided by the division of labour to heavily invest time in their child's early childhood development.
It is worth noting that fathers have all manner of positive impacts, in terms of their children's development. Crucially cognitive development is improved as are motor skills. Even genetic longevity is improved- caused by greater telomere length through epigenetic nurture. Fathers also have a huge benefit at a community level, reducing juvenile violence and increasing social mobility- in Dr Raj Chetty's research on social mobility the rate of fathers in the community in which a child grows up is even more important than quality of education for upward social mobility. In this respect, substantially different rates of fatherhood by ethnicity have a huge impact on both upward social mobility and cognitive development.
In a recent podcast with Coleman Hughes, controversial academic Charles Murray was adamant in his belief in persistent racial IQ gaps (contrary to the views of many, myself included)- but he did caveat by stating that if we were able to the change the culture of underperforming groups then racial IQ gaps would shrink substantially. I don't think it’s culture in the way he means. It's simply that poverty in the West quickly becomes two problems. One is the pure socio-economics of adversity and growing up in less advantageous conditions. The other is the corrosive effect that an intergenerational lack of economic opportunity has, paired with the poorly calibrated efforts of government to help. If the often astounding economic performance of desperately poor incoming migrants is anything to go by, then the latter is far more harmful than the former.
I'm late posting on this, but another interesting read man. always it takes me a while to reply to you, given how detailed and thoughtful your writing is. I have to like read up and process. But you owe me a proper response this time. no more of just liking my comments.
For real, incompetent teachers are freakin kryptonite to students. I reconnected with a former student recently, and she reminded me of the time we were sitting on a bench in the office waiting to see the principal, since the poor kid had been sexually assaulted. and this was the moment when one of her teachers came in and made some shit comment about how she was up to no good again.
There aren't that many of these though. And frankly, I wonder if we have MORE of them up here in Canada, where the gig is genuinely well paid. The States though? Not sure about the UK.
as for kids 'discovering' knowledge, yeah, I agree in general with you, but you overstate the case. no competent teacher that I've ever met - and I've taught everywhere and everything in the 'arts' - - assumes that kids have to discover everything. personally, I'm not into the concept until the kids have a giant foundation of knowledge. but when they have that, and they get to discover? that's dope. some of the best student work I've ever seen comes from that.
when you talk about 'structured low-level discipline'? yeah, 1000%. full stop, controversial statement, but black kids are the primary behavioural problem at every school I've ever taught at, aside from my time in Japan. and i've said this to admin, to colleagues, to 'woke' experts doing BS inclusivity workshops. heck man, I said it to a class once, with like a third of the kids being black. and you know what? nobody disagrees.
"The main reason why progressive teachers complain about teaching for tests in because their inefficient methodology automatically means that there class will fall behind with their curriculum"
You must not know any teachers. the 'discovery' model and opposition to universal testing come from the same ideology. not, they suck and then they cover their asses, or whatever you are suggesting here. man, you and me are on the same side. honestly, you have influence my thinking more than anyone, and I've never even 'met' you. so cut out this BS conservative talking point stuff. you are way to smart to fall into that dynamic.
and standardized testing is awful, in many ways. you want to talk about that subject, I'm happy to provide evidence and references, but I want to finish commenting on your awesome post.
I had to look up 'the Ferguson effect'. can you back that up with some references? seems like it is still up for debate.
the basics of learning language? you nail that. here's an example ... my former principal, who just retired, was super delighted to tell me that she'd ordered bigger desks for the kids so they could form into groups more easily. she hated teachers teaching the classics. she wanted book clubs for everyone.
no fucking non-reader in grade 9 is going to talk about a book just because it's 'culturally relevant'. they don't talk because they don't know how to. and when you do book clubs, you can't teach all the kids at the same time. so the struggling kid struggles more, not less.
for real man. I taught a kid last year who couldn't read. literally. this is the first time in my career in high school that I met a kid who couldn't read. Referred him over and over again, to admin, to guidance - including my favourite all-time colleague. and nobody could help him, because the idea of a kid not being able to read was off the table. they didn't get it. I did my best to help him, but he needed more than one support. I referred him to the black focused support group after school, and he did better there. but they also have super low standards, so most of the time, it was snacks and hanging out.
The VARK stuff ... multiple intelligences is the phrase here- for sure. I mean, I'm a kinisthetic learner, so I need to learn how to read when I'm walking? I'm a verbal learner, so I will learn how to drive with a book? it's wrong. It's not wrong-headed - there is some real value in giving students a variety of ways to learn. but VARK is just simple-minded, convenient BS.
"Cognitive Load Theory"
Yup. "Crucially, it has a huge impact on the potential to enjoy reading for pleasure, because if you are constantly struggling with the basics of literacy it makes for a less enjoyable experience, and one in which the larger meaning of the text sails right over your head"
exactly. the main reason I know this i that my first decade of teaching was ESL based. in the ESL world, you need to master the 500 most commonly used words, and then the next 2000, and so on. (I forget the exact numbers here, so for illustrative purposes only, but I'm close).
English teachers teach literature, not English. generally. and this is a problem. literature is more engaging, literacy is hard to teach in an interesting way. Possible though. frankly, many english teachers don't know much ABOUT english. they were taught in the 'whole word' method, and can't understand people who can't learn that way.
"But if the question is how much influence does such a profoundly clear understanding of how we learn have on the educational theories proposed by academics in the education field have- the answer is very little."
the only prof i had when I did my masters in ed who talked about HOW to learn language? ESL. the most rigorous academic workload I had was in his class. I had a bunch of classes when we just talked about the stuff you describe - what do kids like, etc? I mean, that's important. but the foundation for learning, the fundamentals? man, I asked about grammar during my B ED. asked about behaviour. the answer? interest the kids, everything else will follow.
which is both dumb and impossible for most teachers. I'm a charismatic guy. I can interest kids. but the vast majority of people can't do this easily. how the fuck do you teach teachers charisma? we are essentially expected to be fascinating, not expert. at least in English.
"Under the Obama Administration, evidence of disparity between Blacks and whites in terms of discipline and expulsion rates was seen as evidence of racism"
yeah, and still. and here.
"It only takes modest and continuing disruption in schools to deprive a child of two full years worth of education by the time they leave K-12- and thanks to the perception that disparate discipline is a sign of racism, this disruption will fall most heavily on Black kids."
you've said this many times, I agree, and I think this is powerful. Hit me up with a reference or two, I intend to raise this idea in class in september.
"It's simply that poverty in the West quickly becomes two problems. One is the pure socio-economics of adversity and growing up in less advantageous conditions. The other is the corrosive effect that an intergenerational lack of economic opportunity has, paired with the poorly calibrated efforts of government to help. If the often astounding economic performance of desperately poor incoming migrants is anything to go by, then the latter is far more harmful than the former."
word. man, I hope you reply. I love the stuff you write.
Thought provoking article. Glad to see Dr. Sowell get a mention. Someone needs to explain why the black community was stronger during Jim Crow than they are now. You mention the growing black middle class, which is largely unnoticed because they are going on about life doing the things that allow for being middle class.
Democrats in America will never support real education reform, they depend too much on the support of Unions and the incompetent teachers they protect as well as the dependent classes created by poor culture and poor education.
I'll start with the meaty part first then try to put some bread around it and make a sandwich.
Why should anyone care about "Closing the Gaps" ?
Anyone try to close a gap in education, wealth, health or incarceration is chasing a ghost. It's an illusion or phantasm of the mind. If one tries to close a gap the are not trying to improve the human condition by increasing wisdom, prosperity or vitality, they are just attempting to make one abstraction equal another abstraction.
Consider the gaps between different ethnic groups, why should closing these gaps (and there has to be more than one, as there are more than two ethnic groups) produce anything good ? It certainly MIGHT produce something good but there is no reason to presume it would. Equalizing one statistic with another statistic is not a good in itself.
The only reason that I can see why someone might believe that it is a good in itself is that it causes (or appears to cause) observed reality to conform to a predetermined ideology about human nature, probably something along the lines of "all men are created equal" which is an axiom of faith I do not subscribe to.
If your ideas don't match reality then it's you that needs to change not reality. Hammering round pegs hard enough to fit into your neatly cut square holes is running against the natural order of things (an axiom of faith I do subscribe to) and likely to cause terrible damage.
Let's get more specific and take the case in question, the gap of educational outcomes. Diverting resources from high a performing school where they are put to good use to a low performing school where they are wasted or even straight up stolen could close the gaps even more effectively than an overall increase in the education budget directed toward that under performing schools. The race becomes more even not by giving the slower runner vitamins and training but by starving the faster one. And as the first option is cheaper than the second that will be the one preferred.
The same thing would happen if a new powerful educational technique was developed. If it was applied to both the high performing and low performing schools the gap may reduce somewhat but the the gap closing would be greater if it was applied only to the under performing one. If gap closing is the goal of the bureaucracy then that's the option the bureaucracy will take.
In summary, equality of outcomes is not a worthy goal to pursue, what's the point of being equal if we are all equally shit ?
So that's my sandwich.
What do you think ? Too sloppy ? Too dry ? Too spicy or not spicy enough ?
"if we were able to the change the culture of underperforming groups then racial IQ gaps would shrink substantially."
It would be quite astonishing if a lineage of people selected for ten generations or more to be strong but dumb did not end up strong but dumb. Take that lineage and put them in a welfare/gangsta culture where the less you do for yourself the more the government does for you, and where violence leads to top dog status (with all the money and all the chicks), and one should be astonished if there was no effect on the gene pool. One should expect a lineage of people who are disproportionately dumb, violent, lazy and athletically gifted. This is exactly what we see and it's exactly what we should expect. Change the traits that give advantage and expect the gene pool to migrate toward those more successful traits over several generations. Simple, really. Selection happens.
How Terrible Ideas in Education and the Ruthlessness of White Parents combine to create separate standards for Black Kids.
I'm late posting on this, but another interesting read man. always it takes me a while to reply to you, given how detailed and thoughtful your writing is. I have to like read up and process. But you owe me a proper response this time. no more of just liking my comments.
For real, incompetent teachers are freakin kryptonite to students. I reconnected with a former student recently, and she reminded me of the time we were sitting on a bench in the office waiting to see the principal, since the poor kid had been sexually assaulted. and this was the moment when one of her teachers came in and made some shit comment about how she was up to no good again.
There aren't that many of these though. And frankly, I wonder if we have MORE of them up here in Canada, where the gig is genuinely well paid. The States though? Not sure about the UK.
as for kids 'discovering' knowledge, yeah, I agree in general with you, but you overstate the case. no competent teacher that I've ever met - and I've taught everywhere and everything in the 'arts' - - assumes that kids have to discover everything. personally, I'm not into the concept until the kids have a giant foundation of knowledge. but when they have that, and they get to discover? that's dope. some of the best student work I've ever seen comes from that.
when you talk about 'structured low-level discipline'? yeah, 1000%. full stop, controversial statement, but black kids are the primary behavioural problem at every school I've ever taught at, aside from my time in Japan. and i've said this to admin, to colleagues, to 'woke' experts doing BS inclusivity workshops. heck man, I said it to a class once, with like a third of the kids being black. and you know what? nobody disagrees.
"The main reason why progressive teachers complain about teaching for tests in because their inefficient methodology automatically means that there class will fall behind with their curriculum"
You must not know any teachers. the 'discovery' model and opposition to universal testing come from the same ideology. not, they suck and then they cover their asses, or whatever you are suggesting here. man, you and me are on the same side. honestly, you have influence my thinking more than anyone, and I've never even 'met' you. so cut out this BS conservative talking point stuff. you are way to smart to fall into that dynamic.
and standardized testing is awful, in many ways. you want to talk about that subject, I'm happy to provide evidence and references, but I want to finish commenting on your awesome post.
I had to look up 'the Ferguson effect'. can you back that up with some references? seems like it is still up for debate.
the basics of learning language? you nail that. here's an example ... my former principal, who just retired, was super delighted to tell me that she'd ordered bigger desks for the kids so they could form into groups more easily. she hated teachers teaching the classics. she wanted book clubs for everyone.
no fucking non-reader in grade 9 is going to talk about a book just because it's 'culturally relevant'. they don't talk because they don't know how to. and when you do book clubs, you can't teach all the kids at the same time. so the struggling kid struggles more, not less.
for real man. I taught a kid last year who couldn't read. literally. this is the first time in my career in high school that I met a kid who couldn't read. Referred him over and over again, to admin, to guidance - including my favourite all-time colleague. and nobody could help him, because the idea of a kid not being able to read was off the table. they didn't get it. I did my best to help him, but he needed more than one support. I referred him to the black focused support group after school, and he did better there. but they also have super low standards, so most of the time, it was snacks and hanging out.
The VARK stuff ... multiple intelligences is the phrase here- for sure. I mean, I'm a kinisthetic learner, so I need to learn how to read when I'm walking? I'm a verbal learner, so I will learn how to drive with a book? it's wrong. It's not wrong-headed - there is some real value in giving students a variety of ways to learn. but VARK is just simple-minded, convenient BS.
"Cognitive Load Theory"
Yup. "Crucially, it has a huge impact on the potential to enjoy reading for pleasure, because if you are constantly struggling with the basics of literacy it makes for a less enjoyable experience, and one in which the larger meaning of the text sails right over your head"
exactly. the main reason I know this i that my first decade of teaching was ESL based. in the ESL world, you need to master the 500 most commonly used words, and then the next 2000, and so on. (I forget the exact numbers here, so for illustrative purposes only, but I'm close).
English teachers teach literature, not English. generally. and this is a problem. literature is more engaging, literacy is hard to teach in an interesting way. Possible though. frankly, many english teachers don't know much ABOUT english. they were taught in the 'whole word' method, and can't understand people who can't learn that way.
"But if the question is how much influence does such a profoundly clear understanding of how we learn have on the educational theories proposed by academics in the education field have- the answer is very little."
the only prof i had when I did my masters in ed who talked about HOW to learn language? ESL. the most rigorous academic workload I had was in his class. I had a bunch of classes when we just talked about the stuff you describe - what do kids like, etc? I mean, that's important. but the foundation for learning, the fundamentals? man, I asked about grammar during my B ED. asked about behaviour. the answer? interest the kids, everything else will follow.
which is both dumb and impossible for most teachers. I'm a charismatic guy. I can interest kids. but the vast majority of people can't do this easily. how the fuck do you teach teachers charisma? we are essentially expected to be fascinating, not expert. at least in English.
"Under the Obama Administration, evidence of disparity between Blacks and whites in terms of discipline and expulsion rates was seen as evidence of racism"
yeah, and still. and here.
"It only takes modest and continuing disruption in schools to deprive a child of two full years worth of education by the time they leave K-12- and thanks to the perception that disparate discipline is a sign of racism, this disruption will fall most heavily on Black kids."
you've said this many times, I agree, and I think this is powerful. Hit me up with a reference or two, I intend to raise this idea in class in september.
"It's simply that poverty in the West quickly becomes two problems. One is the pure socio-economics of adversity and growing up in less advantageous conditions. The other is the corrosive effect that an intergenerational lack of economic opportunity has, paired with the poorly calibrated efforts of government to help. If the often astounding economic performance of desperately poor incoming migrants is anything to go by, then the latter is far more harmful than the former."
word. man, I hope you reply. I love the stuff you write.
Thought provoking article. Glad to see Dr. Sowell get a mention. Someone needs to explain why the black community was stronger during Jim Crow than they are now. You mention the growing black middle class, which is largely unnoticed because they are going on about life doing the things that allow for being middle class.
Democrats in America will never support real education reform, they depend too much on the support of Unions and the incompetent teachers they protect as well as the dependent classes created by poor culture and poor education.
Cheers
How about including, within your posts, some hyperlinks to the social science studies you're referring to? That would be immensely helpful.
I'll start with the meaty part first then try to put some bread around it and make a sandwich.
Why should anyone care about "Closing the Gaps" ?
Anyone try to close a gap in education, wealth, health or incarceration is chasing a ghost. It's an illusion or phantasm of the mind. If one tries to close a gap the are not trying to improve the human condition by increasing wisdom, prosperity or vitality, they are just attempting to make one abstraction equal another abstraction.
Consider the gaps between different ethnic groups, why should closing these gaps (and there has to be more than one, as there are more than two ethnic groups) produce anything good ? It certainly MIGHT produce something good but there is no reason to presume it would. Equalizing one statistic with another statistic is not a good in itself.
The only reason that I can see why someone might believe that it is a good in itself is that it causes (or appears to cause) observed reality to conform to a predetermined ideology about human nature, probably something along the lines of "all men are created equal" which is an axiom of faith I do not subscribe to.
If your ideas don't match reality then it's you that needs to change not reality. Hammering round pegs hard enough to fit into your neatly cut square holes is running against the natural order of things (an axiom of faith I do subscribe to) and likely to cause terrible damage.
Let's get more specific and take the case in question, the gap of educational outcomes. Diverting resources from high a performing school where they are put to good use to a low performing school where they are wasted or even straight up stolen could close the gaps even more effectively than an overall increase in the education budget directed toward that under performing schools. The race becomes more even not by giving the slower runner vitamins and training but by starving the faster one. And as the first option is cheaper than the second that will be the one preferred.
The same thing would happen if a new powerful educational technique was developed. If it was applied to both the high performing and low performing schools the gap may reduce somewhat but the the gap closing would be greater if it was applied only to the under performing one. If gap closing is the goal of the bureaucracy then that's the option the bureaucracy will take.
In summary, equality of outcomes is not a worthy goal to pursue, what's the point of being equal if we are all equally shit ?
So that's my sandwich.
What do you think ? Too sloppy ? Too dry ? Too spicy or not spicy enough ?
"if we were able to the change the culture of underperforming groups then racial IQ gaps would shrink substantially."
It would be quite astonishing if a lineage of people selected for ten generations or more to be strong but dumb did not end up strong but dumb. Take that lineage and put them in a welfare/gangsta culture where the less you do for yourself the more the government does for you, and where violence leads to top dog status (with all the money and all the chicks), and one should be astonished if there was no effect on the gene pool. One should expect a lineage of people who are disproportionately dumb, violent, lazy and athletically gifted. This is exactly what we see and it's exactly what we should expect. Change the traits that give advantage and expect the gene pool to migrate toward those more successful traits over several generations. Simple, really. Selection happens.