Numerous educators, scholars, and activists support the idea that schools have a responsibility to help students acquire the cultural capital and social capi-tal they need to achieve academic success (Arriaza, 2003; Collier & Morgan, 2008; Henningsen, Valde, Russell, & Russell, 2011; Lareau & Weininger, 2003; Smith, 2013 ). Many schools do an adequate job of sharing academic require-ments and policies with all students, including those who are poor. The best schools provide an instructional curriculum in which students see themselves and in which students learn not just from teachers but also from adults and activists from the local community. Students in these schools feel valued for their ideas, attitudes, and skills. Unfortunately too few schools prepare their students to understand and navigate the hidden curriculum. They rarely provide poor youth with the con-nections and resources to which wealthier students have access simply because they were born with money. Starting where we are and on the basis of my lived experiences, teaching, and research, I offer the following recommendations for mitigating these disparities. 1. Elementary and secondary administrators have a responsibility to become cognizant of the hidden curriculum and to help teachers learn to identify it and understand its implications. Time and resources should be allocated not only to learning the concept but also to helping students become aware of it and how it operates.

angry. I do not know if it was the tone in their voice or the fact that they would look at me before or after they said the "N word," but it made me uncomfortable and furious. Finally I felt compelled to say something. I raised my hand and asked Ms. Hill, "Why do we have to read a book with the 'N word' in it?" She remarked that it was an American classic. I stated that just because it is a

According to some scholars, the school system privileges individuals who comply with dominant culture, like that of middle-class and upper-middle-class teachers, professional staff, and administrators (Bourdieu, 1984, 1986; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990; Musoba & Baez, 2009). Bourdieu suggests that these privi-leges are likely to be based less on merit or hard work than on the cultural atti-tudes, behaviors, norms, and values of dominant groups. Because Rebecca was assertive and independent, she was penalized. And of course her race made her an especially easy target. It is when these two come together that we see how poverty and race intermingle to marginalize students. Low-income students are more likely to achieve positive educational outcomes (e.g., passing test scores or graduating) once their strengths are recognized, affirmed, and rewarded to the same degree that their middle-class peers' are. Because I was respectful and did not disagree with or challenge other students or educators, teachers accepted me. I was one of the "good ones." My compliance and obedience were rewarded with good grades. However, there were things about the hidden curriculum that became more relevant in high school. My African American teacher had suggested I take an honors class in ninth grade. The majority of the students in the class were White. Only one other person of color, a Black male, was in the class. As I listened to students talk about the different places they visited during their summer vaca-tions, I felt more and more out of place and uncomfortable. I made eye contact with and smiled at some students, but no one reached out to me. Suddenly a short, stout, White woman approached me, introduced herself as Ms. Hill, and stated she was happy I was in her class. She introduced me to the class, directing their attention my way, and asked the students to introduce themselves to me. As class went along Ms. Hill called on different individuals to read aloud passages from a text. Next, she asked us to analyze the passages and look for larger social meanings in them. I was uncomfortable speaking out because I did not want to make dumb comments. During the second week of school,

Swdencs like Jennifer who came from private feeJer schools are at a distinct advantage. Nearly half ( 46 percent) of freshmen in the class of 2000 who came from private feeder schools were plnced in Honors Geometry, compared ro just 18 percent of freshmen from Berkeley public middle schools, all of whom cook Honors Algebra in the eighth grade. Meanwhile, virtually all srndenrs with an undocumented feeder school (students who entered Berkeley High after the semester had already started, mostly from out-of-district cities such as Oakland), who were predominantly African American, were routinely placed in Math A without any assess-ment of their math abilities. Math placement at Berkeley High has far-reaching conse-quences for students' pathways through the Berkeley High course structure. Figure 1.1 illustrates these different pathways by linking ninth-grade math placement with students' course-taking patterns and electives and indicating their corresponding tenth-grnde options for math and science. SQ,1dents who entered Berkeley High with advanced math ~tanding w~ere also more likely to be placed in advanced foreign lan-guage classes. The research team found that 75 percent of ninth graders in "regular" Geomecry and Honors Geometry were caking intermediate or advanced-level foreign language classes, with the remaining 25 percent all in Latin 1, a prestigious language typically taken by college-bound students. In contrast, just 27 percent of stu-dents enrolled in Algebra I as ninth graders were in intermediate foreign language classes, with 53 percent enrolled in a first-year lan-guage course. It is even more disturbing and telling that the remain-ing 16 percent of Algebra 1 students were enrolled in no language class at all.

Tracking on the basis of perceived academic ability is a tradirinn at many American high schools (Oakes, 1985 ), but it has changed over rhe past decades. As awareness has grown about rhe harmful effects of tracking on some students, there has been a shift away from assigning students to rigid tracks that determine all of their classes throughout high school to a more flexible arrangement in which students can vary in track assignment from class to class (Lucas, 1999). Tracking at Berkeley High blurs the sorting process even further. At BHS, ninth graders are placed in math classes ranging from Math A to Honors Geometry without any form of assessment. Typ-ically students are allowed to choose which course they want to take in consultation with counselors, who make recommendations based on an examination of their middle school transcripts. As for their foreign language electives, ninth graders can choose ro enroll in Kiswahili, French. Spanish, Latin, or German, or in no language

There is relatively little that the school can do to address the inequalities in the backgrounds of students like Jennifer and Chantelle. However, it is possible to address school conditions that contribute to disparities in achievement, such as school size, the student-to-counselor ratio, procedures that are used to track stu-dents into higher-an<l lower-level courses, and processes used to provide academic support co students who are struggling. These aspects of the school structure all contribute co the achievement gap, and unlike the backgrounds of students, they can be easily modified and reformed. Social scientists have identified significant resources, or forms of capital, th::tr play a role in influencing student academic out-comes. Research has shown that economic capital, that is, the w~alch and income of parents, is one of the primary factors influ-ep.cing student achieveme11t (Coleman and others, 1966; Roth-stein, 2004; Farkas, 2004 ). Student achievement is also influenced _l,y more subtle resources sud; as social capital-the benefits derived from c<;mnections to networks and individuals with power and influence (Coleman, 1988; Stanton-Salazar, 1997, 2001; Noguera, 2003 )-and cultural capital (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992)-the t~sces, styles, habits, language, behaviors, appearance, and customs c.hat serve as indicators of status anJ privilege. All three forms of c?pital-e';onomic, social, and cultural-play a role in perpetuat-ing disparate educational experiences anJ differential access to edu-cational opportunities. However, they do so in interaction with seemingly neutral structures that operate within schools and society.

The achievement gap at Berkeley High is, in ome sense, a source of puzzlement. How, in a progressive community like Berkeley and in a high school that appears to revel in its commitment to diversity-with its African American Studies Department and freshman ethnic studies requirement-does the structure of the school lend itself to repro<lucing the racial achievement gap? Perhaps even more puzzling, why has it been so difficult to confront and transform the features embedded in the school structure that arc responsible for facilitating success for some and failure for ochers?

We may not be able to untangle the precise effects of all these family-related factors-language use, parental management strategies, and fam-ily stress-on the disparities in children's school readiness and success that have emerged over the past several decades. But the evidence linking income to children's school achievement that we have reviewed suggests that the sharp increase in income differences since the 1970s and the con-comitant gap in children's school success by income is hardly coincidental. Moreover, as states have raised academic standards-a topic we address in the next chapter-the differential impact of income on family life may mean more than it did in the past. America has long depended on its scho

al education levels probably matter even more than family struc-ture and income.24 Alexander's and Garrett's parents had a keen sense of what it would take for their sons to gain admission to a top university; for example, Alexander's mother helped him secure a summer internship in a medical office. None of Anthony's or Harold's parents had any experience with a four-year college. In her conversations with Lareau, Harold's moth-er revealed that she was not acquainted with anyone who was a teacher, reading specialist, family counselor, psychologist, doctor, or lawyer. These kinds of differences affect children's daily experiences and ulti-mately their educational outcomes. Even if the income gap were to narrow, some of these other differences would remain and continue to influence children's educational outcomes. In the 1970s, Betty Hart and Todd Risley discovered an important source of a literacy gap among kindergarteners. 25 The researchers recruited forty-four families with children who had just celebrated their first birthdays. Hart and Risley made an effort to recruit families from all socioeconomic strata-professional, working class, and welfare recipients-all of which were residentially stable and relatively free of dysfunction. For the next two years, team members paid monthly visits

FAMILY INCOME AND SCHOOL SUCCESS 31 The circumstances in which Anthony and Harold grew up, shaped in large part by their families' lower incomes, have left a mark. While some chil-dren have always enjoyed greater benefits and advantages than others, the income gap has widened dramatically over the past four decades. FAMILY STRUCTURE AND PARENTAL EDUCATION While income inequality has played a role in widening the educational divide, it is far from the only factor influencing life chances and academic success. Neither Anthony nor Harold had a father living with him most of the time, although both retained connections with their fathers. Single-parent family structures have become the norm for low-income children but are still quite rare among children in high-income families.22 Grow-ing up in a single-parent family appears to have particularly detrimental consequences for male children, in part because they receive less attention than daughters and in part because their behavior is especially sensitive to levels of attention and warmth.23 Parental education levels probably matter even more than family struc-ture and income.24 Alexander's and Garrett's parents had a keen sense of what it would take for their sons to gain admission to a top university; for example, Alexander's mother helped him secure a summer internship in a medical office. None of Anthony's or Harold's parents had any experience with a four-year college. In her conversations with Lareau, Harold's moth-er revealed that she was not acquainted with anyone who was a teacher, reading specialist, family counselor, psychologist, doctor, or lawyer. These kinds of differences affect children's daily experiences and ulti-mately their educational outcomes. Even if the income gap were to narrow, some of these other differences would remain and continue to influence children's educational outcomes. In the 1970s, Betty Hart and Todd Risley discovered an important source of a literacy gap among kindergarteners. 25 The researchers recruited forty-four families with children who had just celebrated their first birthdays. Hart and Risley made an effort to recruit families from all socioeconomic strata-professional, working class, and welfare recipients-all of which were residentially stable and relatively free of dysfunction. For the next two years, team members paid monthly visits

Permission is needed if Harold or his sister wants something to eat, because food is always in short supply: "One Friday night, for instance, the two pizzas in the oven must be divided among [six family members]. When Harold asks for a second piece of pizza, he is redirected to drink soda. Another night, each child has one meatball, canned yams, and canned spinach for dinner. There is not enough for second helpings." Even more revealing is Harold's younger sister's response when asked what she would do if she had a million dollars: "Oh boy! I'd buy my brother, my sister, my uncle, my aunt, my nieces, and my nephews, and my grand-pop, and my grandmom, and my mom, and my dad, and my friends, not my friends, but mostly my best friend-I'd buy them all clothes ... and sneakers ... and I'd buy my mom some food, and I'd get my brothers and my sisters gifts for their birthdays."9 This level of deprivation can harm children in many ways.10 Poor nutri-tion and inadequate health care have long-term effects on children's in-tellectual development. Exposure to lead paint affects children's nervous systems, resulting in hyperactivity and irritability, with long-term con-sequences for both intellectual and emotional development. Exposure to violence results in an inability to stay focused on the task at hand. In other words, poverty creates deficits in children that are long-lasting and very difficult to overcome. Moreover, as we explain in the next chapter, children

ncreasing income inequality contributes to the growth in achievement gaps, in part because income enables parents to promote learning oppor-tunities and avoid some of the myriad risks to the healthy development of their children. 6 Garrett Tallinger is the pseudonym given by Lareau to a white fourth grader living with his well-to-do parents and two broth-ers in a four-bedroom "classic home in the suburbs." Like Alexander at that age, Garrett is tall and thin, and while his personality is more in-troverted than Alexander's, his competitiveness is on display during his frequent sports activities. Tracking the details of Garrett's life for several weeks, Lareau's fieldworkers observed him as he played baseball and soc-cer, practiced with his swim team, and took piano and saxophone lessons. All but the saxophone were extracurricular activities. They consumed an inordinate amount of the family's weekday and weekend time, and also cost a lot of money: "Soccer costs $15 per month, but there are additional, larger expenses periodically. The ... soccer team's new warm-up suits, socks and shirts cost the Tallingers $100. Piano runs $23 per weekly lesson per child. Tennis clinic is $50; winter basketball $30. It costs the family money to drive to out-of-state tournaments and stay overnight. Fees for Garrett's summer camps have varied; some have cost $200 per week .. . [Mrs. Tallinger] reported expenditures for Garrett alone as exceeding $4,000 per year, a figure that other middle-class families also report."7 These kinds of expenses were not unusual for the upper-middle-class families in Lareau's study. All could easily afford comfortable and reliable cars to transport their children from activity to activity. All lived in spa-cious houses in quiet, relatively crime-free neighborhoods. Circumstances were very different for the working-class and welfare-recipient families. We have already seen the financial constraints that An-thony Mears's family labored under. His family did not have a reliable car and his mother worried about crime in the neighborhood.

The study first assessed the children shortly after they began kinder-garten, providing a picture of their skills at the starting line of their for-mal schooling. It shows that children from families in the top 20 percent of the income distribution already outscore children from the bottom 20 percent by 106 points in early literacy. This difference is nearly twice the size of the gap between the average reading skills of white and both black and Hispanic children at that age, and nearly equal to the amount that the typical child learns during kindergarten. Moreover, the reading gap was even larger when the same children were tested in fifth grade. Gaps in mathematics achievement are also substantial. 2 Children are more successful in school when they are able to pay at-tention, when they get along with peers and teachers, and when they are not preoccupied or depressed because of troubles at home. Using the same SAT-type metric as for reading scores, figure 3.1 shows that, according to teachers, children from more affluent families are more engaged than their low-income peers. Also, children from low-income families are more likely to engage in antisocial behavior and to have mental health problems. These differences are smaller than the differences in reading skills. None of these advantages for high-income children shrinks over the course of elementary school, nor do they decline as children move to high school. Indeed, another national data set focusing on eighth graders in 1988 shows that 95 percent of students from families in the top quarter of the income distribution graduated from high school, as compared with only 64 percent of those from the bottom quarter.3 As we saw in chapter 2, the income-based gap in college graduation rates is even larger and has grown sharply over the last three decades.

Which of these factors are most powerful in determining a child's s Uc-cess in school? While Annette Lareau and her team did not monitor school progress or behavioral development for the children in her study, includ-ing Anthony and Alexander, many national studies have investigated gaps in school performance among children from similarly disparate back-grounds. As shown in chapter 2, math and reading gaps between high-and low-income children have grown substantially over the past three decades. Data from a recent national study of children who entered kindergarten in the fall of 1998 allow for a more detailed look at income-based gaps as chil-dren progress through school (figure 3.1).1 As before, a 100-point difference in figure 3.1 corresponds to one standard deviation. Each bar shows the relative size of the gap between high-and low-income children.

A SNAPSHOT OF Alexander Williams and Anthony Mears at age twenty finds them on strikingly different educational and, in all likelihood, career trajectories. Alexander appears well on his way to an Ivy League degree and medical school. Anthony has a job, but the recent violent deaths of two friends have him just hoping that he will still be alive in five years. It is easy to imagine how the childhood circumstances of these two young men may have shaped their fates. Alexander lived in the suburbs while Anthony lived in the city center. Most of Alexander's suburban neighbors lived in families with incomes above the $125,000 that now sep-arates the richest 20 percent of children from the rest. Anthony Mears's school served pupils from families whose incomes were near or below the $27,000 threshold separating the bottom 20 percent (see figure 2.4). With an income of more than $300,000, Alexander's family was able to spend far more money on Alexander's education, lessons, and other enrichment activities than Anthony's parents could devote to their son's needs. Both of Alexander's parents had professional degrees, so they knew all about what Alexander needed to do to prepare himself for college. An-thony's mother completed some classes after graduating from high school, but his father, a high school dropout, struggled even to read. And in con-trast to Anthony, Alexander lived with both of his parents, which not only added to family income but also increased the amount of time available for a parent to spend with Alexander. 23