Educational policy makers and test critics often assert that standardized test scores are strongly influenced by factors beyond individual differences in academic achievement such as family income and wealth. Unfortunately, few empirical studies consider the simultaneous and related influences of family income, parental education, and high school achievement on college admissions test scores.
Focus Of Study
This research was animated by the nagging question of the association of family income with SAT performance. For example, is the relationship between family income and SAT performance non-linear? Does the relationship differ markedly by race? More importantly, how strong are the effects of poverty on SAT performance?
Research Design
This study is a secondary analysis of a large national sample of Black and White college-bound high school students who took the SAT in 2003 (N = 781,437).
Data Collection and Analysis
Employing data from the College Board's Student Descriptive Questionnaire, this study used structural equation modeling (SEM) to estimate the effects of family income on SAT scores for Black and White examinees accounting for the simultaneous effects of parental education and high school achievement.
Findings/Results
Results suggest the effects of family income on SAT scores, though relatively modest in contrasts to high school achievement, are substantial, non-linear, and nearly twice as large for Black students. Moreover, the unstandardized direct effect of high school achievement on SAT performance is not enough to address the substantial effects of poverty for Black students.
Conclusions/Recommendations
The findings are discussed with respect to social inequality and educational opportunity in college admissions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnyonJ. (1997). Ghetto schooling: A political economy of urban educational reform. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
2.
AughinbaughA., & GittlemanM. (2003). Does money matter? A comparison of the effect of income on child development in the United States and Great Britain. The Journal of Human Resources, 38(2), 416–440.
3.
BeckerG. S., & TomesN. (1979). An equilibrium theory of the distribution of income and intergenerational mobility. Journal of Political Economy, 87, 1153–1189.
4.
BeckerG. S., & TomesN. (1986). Human capital and the rise and fall of families. Journal of Labor Economics, 4, 1–39.
5.
BennersG. A. & EversonH. T. (April 2009). School effects on gender differences in learning mathematics during high school: A multiple group multilevel latent growth analysis of PSAT/NMSQT to SAT performance in mathematical reasoning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Measurement in Education, San Diego, CA.
6.
BlauD. M. (1999). The effect of income on child development. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 81, 261–276.
7.
BerendsM., & PeñalozaR. (2010). Increasing racial isolation and test score gaps in mathematics: A 30-year perspective. Teachers College Record, 112(4), 978–1007.
8.
BirchH. G., & GussowJ. D. (1970). Disadvantaged children: Health, nutrition, and school failure. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich and Grune & Stratton.
9.
BlauD. M. (1999). The effect of income on child development. Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(2), 261–276.
10.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
11.
BourdieuP. (1986). The forms of capital. In RichardsonJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education.Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
12.
BowenW.G., and BokD. (1998). The shape of the river.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
CamaraW. J. & SchmidtA. E. (1999). Group differences in standardized testing and social stratification. College Board Report (99)5. New York, NY: College Board.
15.
CardD., & RothsteinJ. (2007). Racial segregation and the black-white test score gap. Journal of Public Economics, 91(11-12), 2158–2184.
16.
College Board. (2003). 2003 college bound seniors. New York, NY: College Board.
17.
College Board. (1999). Reaching the top: A report of the national task force on minority high achievement.New York, NY: College Board.
18.
ConleyD. (1999). Being Black, living in the red: Race, wealth, and social policy in America.Berkeley CA: University of California Press.
19.
CrouseJ., & TrusheimD. (1988). The case against the SAT. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
Datcher-LouryLinda. (1989). ‘Family Background and School Achievement Among Low Income Blacks.’The Journal of Human Resources24: 528–544.
21.
DeNavas-WaltC., ProctorB. D., & MillsR. J. (2004). Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2003. U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Reports, P60-226. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
22.
Dixon-RománE. (2007). The mystery of inequity: Modeling the influence of intergenerational access on intellective competence. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Fordham University: New York, NY.
23.
Dixon-RománE. (2010). Inheritance and an economy of difference: The importance of supplementary education. in LinL., GordonE.W., & VarenneH. (Eds.), Educating comprehensively: Varieties of educational experiences. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press.
24.
DooleyM., & StewartJ. (2004). Family income and child outcomes in Canada. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 37(4), 898–917.
25.
DuncanG. J., & Brooks-GunnJ. (1997a). Consequences of growing up poor.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
26.
DuncanG. J., & Brooks-GunnJ. (1997b). Income effects across the life span: Integration and interpretation. In DuncanG. J. & Brooks-GunnJ. (Eds.), Consequences of growing up poor.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
27.
DuncanG. J., HustonA. C., & WeisnerT. S. (2007). Higher ground: New hope for the working poor and their children.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
EversonH., & MillsapR. (2004). Beyond individual differences: Exploring school effects on SAT scores. Educational Psychologist, 39(3), 157–172.
30.
EversonH. T., & MillsapR. (2005). Everyone gains: Extracurricular activities in high school and higher SAT scores. In GordonE. W., MeroeA.E., & BridgallB. (Eds.), Supplementary education: The hidden curriculum of high academic achievement.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
31.
EversonH., MillsapR., & DionesR. (April, 1995). Exploring group differences in SAT performance using structural equation modeling with latent means. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
32.
FassS., & CauthenN. K. (2008). Who are America's poor children? The official story. New York: National Center for Children in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University.
33.
FreedleR. (2003). Correcting the SAT's ethnic and social-class bias: A method for re-estimating SAT scores. Harvard Educational Review, 73(1), 1–43.
34.
GeiserS., & StudleyR. (2001). UC and the SAT: Predictive validity and differential impact of the SAT I and SAT II at the University of California. Retrieved March 1, 2009 from the University of California Office of the President, http://www.ucop.edu/sas/research/researchand-planning/pdf/sat_study.pdf
35.
GordonE. W., BridglallB. L., & MeroeA. S. (2005). Supplementary education: The hidden curriculum of high academic achievement.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
36.
GuinierL. & TorresG. (2002). The miner's canary: Enlisting race, resisting power, transforming democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37.
GuoG. (1998). The timing of the influences of cumulative poverty on children's cognitive ability and achievement, Social Forces, 77(1), 257–287.
38.
GutiérrezR., & Dixon-RománE. (2011). Beyond gap gazing: How can thinking about education comprehensively help us (re)envision mathematics Education? In AtwehB., GravenM., SecadaW., and ValeroP. (Eds.), Mapping equity and quality in mathematics education. New York, NY: Springer.
39.
HedgesL. & NowellA. (1998). Black-White test score convergence since 1965. In JencksC. & PhillipsM. (Eds.), The Black-White test score gap.Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
40.
HedgesL. & NowellA. (1999). Changes in the Black-White gap in achievement test scores: The evidence from nationally representative samples. Sociology of Education, 7, 111–135.
41.
HornJ. L. & McArdleJ. J. (1980). Perspectives on Mathematical and Statistical Model Building (MASMOB) in research on aging. In PoonL. (Ed.), Aging in the 1980s: Psychological issues (pp. 503–541). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
42.
HornJ. L. & McArdleJ. J. (1992). A practical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117–144.
43.
JacksonJ. L. (2008). Racial paranoia: The unintended consequences of political correctness. New York, NY: Basic Books.
44.
JBHE Foundation. (1998). Why family income differences don't explain the racial gap in SAT scores. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 20, 6–8.
45.
JencksC. & PhillipsM. (1998). The Black-White test score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
46.
KlineR. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
47.
KonstantopoulosS., & HedgesL. V. (2008). How large an effect can we expect from school reforms?Teachers College Record, 110(8), 1613–1640.
48.
LareauA. (2003). Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
49.
LeeJ., & WongK. K. (2004). The impact of accountability on racial and socioeconomic equity: Considering both school resources and achievement outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 41(4), 797–832.
50.
LoehlinJ. C. (2004). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and structural equation analysis (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51.
MarshH. W., & KleitmanS. (2002). Extracurricular school activities: The good, the bad, and the nonlinear. Harvard Educational Review, 72(4), 464–514.
52.
MasseyD. S., CondronG. A., & DentonN. A. (1987). The effects of residential segregation on black social and economic well-being. Social Forces, 66, 29–57.
53.
MassetD. S., & DentonN. A. (1993). American apartheid: segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54.
MayerS. (1997). What money can't buy: Family income and children's life chances.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55.
MazumderB. (2005). The apple falls even closer to the tree than we thought: New and revised estimates of the intergenerational inheritance of earnings. In BowlesS., GintisH., and GrovesM. O. (Eds.), Unequal chances: Family background and economic success.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
56.
McArdleJ. J. (2008). Latent variable modeling of longitudinal data. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 577–605.
57.
MickelsonR. A. (2006). Segregation and the SAT. Ohio State Law Journal, 67, 157–199.
58.
MillerL. S. (1997). An American imperative: Accelerating minority educational advancement. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
59.
MuthénB., KaplanD., & HollisM. (1987). On structural equation modeling with data that are not missing completely at random. Psychometrika, 51, 431–462.
60.
MuthénL. K., & MuthénB. O. (1998–2010). Mplus User's Guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
61.
National Association for College Admissions Counseling. (2008). Report of the commission on the use of standardized tests in undergraduate admission. Arlington, VA: National Association for College Admission Counseling.
62.
OrrA. J. (2003). Black-white differences in achievement: The importance of wealth. Sociology of Education, 76(4), 281–304.
63.
OwingsJ., McMillenM., & BurkettJ. (1995). Making the cut: Who meets highly selective college entrance criteria? (pp. 3–4). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
64.
PayneK. J., & BiddleB. J. (1999). Poor school funding, child poverty, and mathematics achievement, Educational Researcher, 28(6), 4–13.
65.
PengC.-Y. J., HarwellM., LiouS.-M., & EhmanL. H. (2006). Advances in missing data methods and implications for educational research. In SawilowskyS. (Ed.), Real data analysis (pp. 31–78). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
66.
PerryI. (2011). More Beautiful and more terrible: The embrace and transcendence of racial inequality in the United States. New York, NY: NYU Press
67.
PhillipsM., Brooks-GunnJ., DuncanG. J., KlebanovP., & CraneJ. (1998). Family background, parent practices, and the black-white test score gap. In JencksC. & PhillipsM. (Eds.), The black-white test score gap (pp. 103–145). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
68.
RaykovT., & MarcoulidesG. A. (2006). A first course in structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
69.
RothsteinR. (2004). Class and schools: Using social, economic, and educational reform to close the Black-White achievement gap.Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
70.
SantelicesM. V., & WilsonM. (2010). Unfair treatment? The case of Freedle, the SAT, and the Standardization Approach to Differential Item Functioning. Harvard Educational Review80(1), 106–133.
71.
SextonP.C. (1961). Education and income. New York, NY: Viking Press.
72.
SirinS. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453.
73.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). Survey of Income and Program Participation Users’ Guide (3rd ed.). Retrieved December 14, 2009 from the Demographics Survey Division, Survey of Income and Program Participation branch website: http://www.census.gov/sipp/usrguide/sipp2001.pdf
WhiteK. (1982). The relation between socioeconomic status and academic achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 91(3), 461–481.
76.
WhiteS. B., ReynoldsP. D., ThomasM. M., & GitzlaffN. J. (1993). Socioeconomic status and achievement revisited. Urban Education, 28, 328–343.
77.
WightmanL. F. (1995). Legal education at the close of the twentieth century: Descriptions and analyses of students, financing and professional expectations and attitudes.Newtown, PA: Law School Admission Council.
78.
WilsonW. J. (1980). The declining significance of race: Blacks and changing American institutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
79.
WilsonW. J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
80.
WilsonW. J. (2009). More than just race: being Black and poor in the inner city. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Co.
81.
YeungW. J., & ConleyD. (2008). Black-White achievement gap and family wealth. Child Development, 79(2), 303–324.
82.
ZwickR. (2004). Is the SAT a ‘Wealth Test’? The link between educational achievement and socioeconomic status (pp. 203–216). In ZwickR., (Ed.). Rethinking the SAT in university admissions. New York, NY: Routledge Falmer.
