Experimental Effects of “Opportunity Gap” and “Achievement Gap” Frames

IF 3.3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
David M. Quinn
{"title":"Experimental Effects of “Opportunity Gap” and “Achievement Gap” Frames","authors":"David M. Quinn","doi":"10.1177/00380407251321372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Racial equity in education is often framed around “closing the achievement gap,” but many scholars argue this frame perpetuates deficit mindsets. The “opportunity gap” (OG) frame has been offered as an alternative to focus attention on structural injustices. In a preregistered survey experiment, I estimate the effects of framing racial equity in education around “achievement gaps” (AGs) versus OGs. I find U.S. adult respondents on MTurk gave higher priority to “closing the racial opportunity gap” versus “closing the racial achievement gap” (effect size = 0.11 SD). When randomly assigned to read an OG frame before being asked to explain the Black/White “achievement gap,” respondents were less likely to endorse cultural or individual-level explanations compared with respondents only shown AG statistics (effect size = –0.10 SD). I find no evidence the OG frame affected respondents’ racial stereotypes or policy preferences.","PeriodicalId":51398,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Education","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00380407251321372","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Racial equity in education is often framed around “closing the achievement gap,” but many scholars argue this frame perpetuates deficit mindsets. The “opportunity gap” (OG) frame has been offered as an alternative to focus attention on structural injustices. In a preregistered survey experiment, I estimate the effects of framing racial equity in education around “achievement gaps” (AGs) versus OGs. I find U.S. adult respondents on MTurk gave higher priority to “closing the racial opportunity gap” versus “closing the racial achievement gap” (effect size = 0.11 SD). When randomly assigned to read an OG frame before being asked to explain the Black/White “achievement gap,” respondents were less likely to endorse cultural or individual-level explanations compared with respondents only shown AG statistics (effect size = –0.10 SD). I find no evidence the OG frame affected respondents’ racial stereotypes or policy preferences.
“机会差距”和“成就差距”框架的实验效应
教育中的种族平等通常围绕“缩小成就差距”展开,但许多学者认为,这种框架使赤字心态永久化。“机会差距”(OG)框架是将注意力集中在结构性不公正问题上的另一种选择。在一项预先登记的调查实验中,我估计了围绕“成就差距”(AGs)和“成就差距”(OGs)构建教育中的种族平等的影响。我发现MTurk上的美国成年受访者更重视“缩小种族机会差距”,而不是“缩小种族成就差距”(效应值= 0.11标准差)。当被随机分配在被要求解释黑人/白人“成就差距”之前阅读OG框架时,与只显示AG统计数据的受访者相比,受访者不太可能支持文化或个人层面的解释(效应大小= -0.10 SD)。我没有发现任何证据表明OG框架影响了受访者的种族刻板印象或政策偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.10%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Sociology of Education (SOE) provides a forum for studies in the sociology of education and human social development. SOE publishes research that examines how social institutions and individuals’ experiences within these institutions affect educational processes and social development. Such research may span various levels of analysis, ranging from the individual to the structure of relations among social and educational institutions. In an increasingly complex society, important educational issues arise throughout the life cycle.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信