Spring 2004 Table of Contents-Harvard Educational Review

In this article, Bryan McKinley Jones Brayboy explores how the experiences of Tom, Debbie, and Heather, three Native American students attending Ivy League universities in the 1990s, reflect larger societal beliefs and statements about the perceived place of Native Americans in higher education and U.S. society. Brayboy posits that Native Americans are visible in these institutions in ways that contribute to their marginalization, surveillance, and oppression. In response, the three Native American students exercise strategies that make them invisible to the largely White communities in which they attend school. These strategies help to preserve the students’ sense of cultural integrity, but further serve to marginalize them on campus. At times, the students in the study make themselves visible to emphasize that they are a voice in the campus community. Brayboy argues that these strategies, while possibly confusing to the layperson, make sense if viewed from the perspective of the students preserving their cultural integrity. (pp. 125–152)

In this article, Na’ilah Suad Nasir expands the literature on resistance theory by exploring the institutional response to classic “resistant” or “oppositional” student behavior. Using the case of one boy in an urban Muslim school who displays these resistant behaviors, she shows how the ideational artifacts of family and spirituality are enacted within the school context to support his growth. Nasir draws on data from extensive interviews and observations at the school site to paint a rich and complex picture of the dynamics at play when students appear to resist school. Rather than framing resistance as the property of the child, Nasir looks at how resistance can be cocreated in cultural settings and offers a potentially helpful perspective on how to construct schools in which resistant behavior does not become the norm. (pp. 153–174)

In this article, Manju Varma-Joshi, Cynthia Baker, and Connie Tanaka examine the impact of racialized name-calling on a group of twenty-six “visible minority” youth from New Brunswick, Canada. Through one-on-one interviews and focus groups, the authors compare views held by visible minority students and their parents to the views of White authority figures regarding the significance of racism and racialized name-calling at school. While White authority figures often view name-calling — even that of a racialized nature — as common adolescent behavior, the visible minority participants equate such name-calling with a serious form of harassment and violence. The authors contend that much of the disparity in these views is the result of White authority figures’ perception of racialized name-calling as isolated incidents rather than part of a continual pattern of harassment encountered by visible minority students. As a result of this disparity, the authors identify three responses to racism that the youth participants typically enact: splintered universe, spiraling resistance, and disengagement. These responses are often destructive to visible minority students and negatively affect their school experiences. The authors recommend increased attention by school authorities to the everyday racist assaults that visible minority students have to endure. (pp. 175–208)

Harvard Educational Review
Summer 2004 Reviews of Current Books
(Full Text)

Tough Fronts: The Impact of Street Culture on Schooling
by L. Janelle Dance.
New York: Routledge-Falmer, 2002. 187 pp. $22.95.

In Tough Fronts: The Impact of Street Culture on Schooling, sociologist L. Janelle Dance draws on four years of ethnographic research with Boston and Cambridge (Mass.) middle and high school boys of African, Afro Caribbean, and Latino Caribbean descent to study the “tough fronts,” or postures, that they use to navigate the urban streets of their daily lives. Inspired by critical theorists and pedagogues who critique the role of schools in alleviating inequality, Dance attempts to expose the fact that “beneath the surface of tough postures lie student critiques of the schooling mechanisms that facilitate inequality” (p. 3) in our society. Her findings suggest that students’ adoption of these tough fronts is the result of the complex interplay between society’s race- and class-based assumptions about low-income urban youth of color and the strategic survival instincts that many of these students develop in order to navigate their neighborhoods and streets.

Dance states at the outset of her book that her research objectives are threefold: 1) to better understand the experience of street-savvy students who act “hard” and assume “tough fronts”; 2) to explore the implications of such posturing on schooling; and 3) to insert the lives of students into the scholarly debate about urban education in America. Accordingly, she addresses these objectives by juxtaposing scholarly research on the social marginalization of Black Americans (Part One) with student narratives about their own experience in schools (Part Two), and then ends by examining the broader policy implications for schools and educators attempting to understand and engage street-savvy students (Part Three).

In Part One, Dance presents the “expert” view of Black socialization and marginalization by reviewing depictions of Black Americans within the scholarly literature, as well as those views held by teachers and administrators in urban schools. She contends that the “gaze” cast upon the Black community is often an “essentialist” one that disregards the “contradictions and hybridity . . . eclectic and syncretic practices” (p. 17) found within Black American culture. Instead, these expert views often classify Black Americans as 1) inferior, deviant, or dysfunctional; 2) mainstream or decent; 3) virtuous and central; 4) the victims of historical and sociostructural forces; or 5) oppositional or antagonistic.

Dance briefly summarizes the major schools of thought within each of these categories, reporting on such prominent ideas as social Darwinism, biological determinism, and culture of poverty theories, Afrocentrism, theories of sociostructural racism, and oppositional culture theory. Dance integrates the ideas behind some of these theories in her account of Malik, an African American student whose teachers both doubted his ability to excel in school and failed to express any knowledge or understanding of the street culture from which he came. Dance uses Malik’s story to illustrate the power of teachers’ theories-in-action in building relationships with their students. She asserts that those teachers who are representative of White mainstream culture, who are unempathetic to the pressures of the street, and who are, therefore, not considered “down” by street-savvy youth are more likely to encounter oppositional behavior from these students. While these youth may perceive such behavior as a form of political resistance to “Euro-assimilationist expectations” (p. 37), teachers and administrators are more likely to consider it troublemaking and respond by suspending, expelling, or gradually pushing these students out of school.

Dance opens Part Two with a description of three “ideal-types” (p. 53) within the urban gangster theme and the gangsterlike postures that these types assume: 1) “hardcore,” 2) hardcore wannabe,” and 3) “hardcore enough.” Dance notes that many of us are familiar with the characteristics of hardcore (or simply hard) youth from journalistic and popular media images. These youth are depicted as “urban gangstas” who are “America’s worst nightmare: young, black and [don]’t give a fuck” (p. 55). For these youth, gangsterlike behavior and mannerisms are essential to their survival on the streets. By contrast, hardcore wannabes do not typically live in neighborhoods where illicit street activities commonly take place. As a result, these youth are not as fluent in the mannerisms, postures, and activities that define a true gangster lifestyle. Nevertheless, they crave the attention and respect that accompanies such posturing, and therefore display such behavior in order to gain social esteem. In between these two extremes are youth who are hardcore enough — in other words, those youth who seek to avoid gangsterlike posturing but who are able to call upon these mannerisms and defend themselves quite effectively when necessary.

For each of these groups, Dance examines their level of commitment to the schooling experience and the subsequent influence of this commitment on their decisions to pursue a gangster life. While hardcore wannabe and hardcore enough youth maintain some degree of investment in school, actual hardcore students run the greatest risk of being pushed out. Dance contends that “becoming hard is a process facilitated by student experiences of social marginalization within and beyond the walls of the school” (p. 57). Consequently, feeling alienated by the school process and its attendant mainstream ideals, hardcore youth may see few alternatives but to develop the “charismatic authority” (p. 69) that accompanies street-savvy behavior and immerse themselves completely in the illicit activities of street culture.

In chapters four and five, Dance weaves theories of social and cultural capital into the narratives of Malcolm, a street-savvy African American ninth grader, and Ms. Bronzic, the White, Jewish sixth-grade teacher who once taught him. In her description of their relationship, Dance gives life to the argument that she began in chapter two about the importance of caring relationships between teachers and students. Ultimately, she contends that such relationships not only have the potential to demystify and provide access to the dominant culture of power for at-risk urban students, but they also help these students begin to see themselves as academically competent with the ability to succeed in school and beyond.

In Part Three, Dance concludes her study by examining the “symbolic violence” (p. 128) that many Black people encounter on a daily basis and the subsequent vilification of Black males in reality and in the media that accompanies it. Despite such routine assaults, however, she asserts that organizations such as Boston’s Paul Robeson Institute for Positive Self-Development work to combat such vilification through academic and personal mentoring activities for young Black males. Ultimately, Dance contests the myth of schools as the great equalizer and offers the findings from her study as a way to increase schools’ effectiveness and to truly eliminate the inequality that exists within these institutions.

Though Dance’s focus is limited to the plight of at-risk boys and leaves girls — who often face similar assaults and don similar “hard” postures — on the sidelines, her recommendations are appropriate for educators who work with all students in danger of falling through the cracks. By maintaining consistently high expectations for at-risk, street-savvy youth while increasing their understanding of students’ lives outside of school, educators can begin to break through some of these tough fronts and positively influence the lives and agency of urban youth.

Temperament in the Classroom: Understanding Individual Differences
by Barbara K. Keogh.
Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 2003. 199 pp. $24.95.

Much attention has been given to the roles of intellectual and language ability in children’s school success. Little attention has been paid, however, to the role of temperament. Teachers and researchers acknowledge that children’s temperaments influence their reactions to the school environment and their interactions with others. Therefore, it is important to address how individual temperaments — those of students and teachers — contribute to children’s learning and achievement. Barbara Keogh addresses this issue in Temperament in the Classroom, outlining research on temperament and describing how an understanding of it can enhance the lives of students and teachers. Keogh uses case studies throughout the book to illustrate the concepts she addresses.

Keogh begins in the first two chapters with in-depth descriptions of temperament and how it has been defined and operationalized by various researchers. She concludes that, while definitions vary across researchers, they “share the common recognition that individual differences in temperament are real and that they are relatively enduring” (p. 15). After providing a synopsis of the definitions of temperament, Keogh describes what temperament researchers have termed the structure of temperament. Structure refers to the organization of the different components of temperament. Despite some differences in researchers’ descriptions of the structures, Keogh notes that there are many similarities, including children’s social reactions to others and their activity levels. Keogh concludes chapter two with a discussion of temperament types — groups of children who exhibit similar temperament patterns. For example, she discusses Thomas and Chess’ (1977) three primary constellations of temperament characteristics: easy, difficult, and slow-to-warm-up. She then describes how groups of children with specific temperament types behave in the classroom.

In chapter three, Keogh outlines the implications of temperament for children’s experiences at home and school. She emphasizes that the role of temperament is interactional in that children’s temperament influences how others respond to them, as well as how they respond to others. Therefore, even children in the same family may be treated differently. Considering temperament from an interactionist perspective relies on the concept of goodness of fit — the idea that interactions may lead to positive or negative outcomes depending upon the congruency of environmental demands and an individuals’ ability and characteristics. Keogh emphasizes, however, that several factors must be considered when thinking about goodness of fit and the classroom. Included in these factors are varying ways difficult temperament is viewed across cultures. Keogh warns that cultural differences in how a “child’s behavior is viewed may lead to misunderstandings and disagreements in parent-teacher conferences about a child who is having problems in school, and may disrupt plans for needed services” (p. 36). In her discussion of the interactionist perspective of temperament, Keogh also notes that different types of temperament may be a source of either risk or resilience for children, depending on the fit between children’s temperament and the environment.

After providing a thorough introduction to temperament, Keogh describes the bases for temperament in chapter four. In this discussion, she describes the interacting influences of genetics and experience on an individuals’ temperament and concludes that

Keogh also reviews studies that relate to temperament, intelligence, and personality. She concludes that the concordance between intelligence and temperament is modest. However, personality and temperament have many shared elements. In particular, personality dimensions of extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism correspond to temperament dimensions of approach/withdrawal, positive mood self-regulation, and emotional stability, respectively.

Chapters five and six discuss the influence of temperament on the behaviors of and interactions between children and teachers in the classroom. In chapter five, Keogh focuses on research that investigates the influence of temperament on student achievement, as measured through standardized tests and grades. Interestingly, researchers have found stronger associations between children’s temperaments and school grades than between temperament and standardized tests. Keogh discusses several possible mechanisms through which child temperament impacts achievement. Included in these mechanisms is the goodness of fit between children’s temperaments and the classroom environment. For example, a highly structured classroom environment may be ideal for some children but disastrous for others.

In chapter six, Keogh addresses the role of child temperament in teachers’ academic decisions about children. She discusses multiple studies that have examined associations between children’s behaviors in the classroom and teachers’ expectations for their success. She notes that “children’s behavioral styles that are consistent with teachers’ expectations have a good probability of leading to compatible and positive experiences in the classroom for both students and teachers” (pp. 84–85).

Keogh discusses the relationship between temperament and behavior problems in chapter seven, emphasizing that not all children with difficult temperaments develop behavior problems in school. She notes that temperament alone cannot explain behavior problems in a classroom, and that the expression of behavior problems depends on how children’s temperaments interact with their environments. In summary, temperament and behavior problems are not the same.

In chapter eight, Keogh addresses the significance of temperament for children with physical, learning, and psychological disabilities. Like children without disabilities, children with disabilities evidence a range of temperaments. Although there is no correlation between disability type and temperament, children with disabilities often require more individual attention than children without disabilities. These increased demands may put children at risk for interactions with parents and teachers that are marked by frustration, and children’s temperaments may be a source of risk or resilience. For example, an easy temperament may be a source of resilience and a difficult temperament a source of risk.

In chapter nine, Keogh outlines the different ways temperament can be assessed. The three most frequently used methods to assess temperament are interviews, direct observation, and rating scales or questionnaires. These approaches rely on individual references in children’s temperaments, based on their behavioral style — the “how” of behavior. Keogh warns that when using these observational techniques one must be aware of the skills and sensitivity of the observer, as these may affect their ratings of the child. Within this chapter, Keogh also lists questionnaires and scales that are psychometrically sound and have been proven useful in assessing children’s temperament. Assessing children’s temperaments, however, is only part of the picture. Children’s temperaments interact with teachers’ temperaments in the classroom. Therefore, studying teachers’ temperaments is also important. Keogh ends this chapter by outlining measures that are appropriate for use with adults.

Keogh concludes the book with a chapter outlining the applications of temperament in schools. Within this chapter, she addresses three questions:

From analyzing these questions, Keogh concludes that an interactionist framework is important for understanding students’ classroom experiences. Both children’s and teachers’ temperaments impact how effective classroom teaching practices are and the quality of teacher-child interactions. Classroom management based on awareness of children’s and teachers’ temperaments leads to improved classroom environments for all students.

In the appendices, Keogh provides detailed information on longitudinal studies of temperament and information on publications and programs on temperament for teachers and parents. In Temperament in the Classroom, Keogh demonstrates that educators’ awareness of their own and children’s temperaments and the influence of these on their interactions can affect the climate of the classroom and the quality of children’s school experiences.

Same, Different, Equal: Rethinking Single-Sex Schooling
by Rosemary C. Salomone.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003. 304 pp. $29.95.

Reflecting on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1996 ruling overturning the Virginia Military Institute’s (VMI) admissions policy barring female applicants, the opening of an all-girl public middle school (the Young Women’s Leadership School in New York City), the school choice movement, and other educational developments, author Rosemary C. Salomone explores the topic of single-sex schooling. In Same, Different, Equal, she embraces a more complex understanding of gender (looking beyond our preconceptions) and considers the historical and legal rulings to answer the questions inherent in single-sex schooling: “Is it legal within public schooling, and whether it produces educational benefits for girls [and] boys?” (p. 6) Salomone also encourages opponents of single-sex schooling to go beyond the text of these questions and consider the subtext, which includes the history and politics of single-sex schooling and their effect on public discourse and policy.

In chapter one, “Text and Subtext,” Salomone takes care to contextualize her arguments by briefly highlighting the “educational developments, political reactions, and legal events” (p. 5) related to single-sex schooling. The backdrop of this chapter includes the Supreme Court’s striking down of VMI’s admissions policy and the subsequent reverberations, and the renewed public interest in single-sex education. Chapter two, “A Tale of Three Cities,” complements chapter one by providing a detailed account of three inner-city, all-girl public schools that have endured “over a century and a half of sweeping social change” (p. 6). The stories of all three schools — the Young Women’s Leadership School in New York City, the Philadelphia High School for Girls, and Baltimore’s Western High School — provide insights into the world of single-sex schools, and Salomone offers a glimpse into the rich history each has built in the face of legal threats and political opposition.

Chapter three, “Equality Engendered,” moves beyond the personal realities of single-sex schools as experienced by students and their families to a discussion of the complex arguments surrounding single-sex schooling. These arguments, “grounded in history, philosophy, and law, and informed by developmental psychology” (p. 37), are centered on the concept of “equality” and its meaning in the context of single-sex schooling. Salomone explores the various conceptions and meanings and offers a theoretical framework, grounded in feminist jurisprudence (as well as theories of psychology, sociology, history, and literacy studies, among other disciplines), to examine the question of how educational equality can be reconciled with single-sex schooling. This framework includes the concepts of sameness, difference, dominance, and (in) essentialism. Salomone posits that these concepts are “essential to unraveling the paradoxes and dilemmas inherent in [the] seemingly irresolvable debate over single-sex educations” (p. 42).

In chapter four, “Myths and Realities in the Gender Wars,” Salomone argues that if educators and policymakers are to reach a consensus on how to level the educational playing field for boys and girls, these two constituencies must have a “shared understanding of competing concerns” (p. 64), with regard to single-sex schooling. To this end, she reviews and offers a sensitive critique of the research on gender and education, highlighting the ways in which a broader view — one that focuses on similarities and differences between girls and boys — opens the single-sex debate. Chapter five, “Who’s Winning, Who’s Losing, and Why?” goes further to examine the “intense and inconclusive” debate over gender and schooling. Sifting through more than two decades of arguments against single-sex schooling, Salomone seeks to identify present-day meaning while staying attuned to the implications of same-sex versus mixed-sex schooling. Recognizing the often overlooked influence of race, culture, and social class in the push toward gender equality, she appropriately concludes that the questions of who is “winning” and “losing” academically is complicated, defying simple conclusions on both the “what” and “why.” Salomone urges educators to focus on improving the “differential performance and maximiz[ing] the potential of different populations of girls and boys across schooling experience . . . without falling into . . . harmful stereotypes and gender essentialism” (p. 125).

Chapters six and seven, “Legal Narratives” and “Reconciling the Law,” offer a review of judicial ambiguities, legislative “gridlock,” and the modern-day struggles to achieve gender equity. Chapter six provides an account of several seminal court cases, such as Brown v. Board of Education, Plessy v. Ferguson, and Garrett v. Board of Education. Salomone also examines the impact of congressional rulings of Title IX, the agency of the Office of Civil Rights, and the subsequent dismantling of single-sex enrollment at both VMI and The Citadel, within the debate of single sex schooling and coeducation. For example, she posits three provisions in the current regulations of Title IX that need to be reexamined: the comparability standard, affirmative action exception, and prohibition against single-sex classes. As currently written, these regulations do not account for the changes in social realities, nor for the expanded understanding of child and adolescent development, learning, and achievement by congress and lawyers affiliated with the now reorganized Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

In chapter eight, “The Research Evidence,” Salomone “attempts to cut through the subjective analysis . . . that has . . . paralyzed the search for evidence supporting single-sex schooling” (p. 191). Her review of the research includes findings from both peer-review journals and anecdotal reports published since 1980, thus allowing her to capture a contemporary view on sex roles. The literature includes research on women’s colleges, institutional environments, single-sex schools in the United States and abroad, and the current debate on the education of boys, among other topical areas. In her review of the literature, Salomone finds “no clear indication that single-sex schooling harms students academically” (p. 235). In fact, she finds evidence that single-sex schools develop more positive attitudes toward certain traditional male or female subjects in students of the opposite gender, and that disadvantaged minority students benefit both academically and socially from such schools. These findings have been attributed to the emphasis of single-sex schools in the promotion of leadership opportunities, the reduction of risk factors (e.g., teen pregnancy, drug abuse, etc.), and access to courses often gendered in coeducational schools, among other factors. Given that the majority of research focuses on higher education, Salomone suggests that future research examine the “effects of single-sex schooling and classes for boys and girls at the elementary, middle school, and high school level in rural, suburban, and rural contexts” (p. 236).

The final chapter, “Rethinking Single-Sex Schooling,” summarizes the main point of each chapter while considering the merits and potential challenges of single-sex schooling. Salomone urges educators and organizers of single-sex schooling to be mindful of the educational effects and of the questions of legality, especially with regard to public schools. She further posits that, “at its best, single-sex education can be an effective tool of empowerment and self-realization for some boys and girls,” and at its worst it can be “a tool of gender polarization and oppression” (p. 243). The remaining question becomes how to provide an appropriate education for girls and boys, regardless of social location, that is informed by their developmental needs, gender-wise, as they move through childhood, adolescence, and toward adulthood.

The Gatekeepers: Inside the Admissions Process of a Premier College
by Jacques Steinberg.
New York: Viking, 2002. 292 pp. $25.95.

The Gatekeepers is an engaging account of a year in the lives of an admissions officer and six high school seniors whose paths converge at Wesleyan University. Steinberg, an education reporter for the New York Times, garnered the opportunity to observe the Wesleyan University admissions office assembling the 1999 freshman class.

Those reading The Gatekeepers to find tips on how to gain admission to an elite college will not find much here. As Steinberg states, “I have made a conscious decision not to write yet another volume for the buckling shelf of books that promise to reveal the secret password for gaining entrance to a top college” (p. xxii). Instead, we learn that “the job of an admissions officer at an elite private college has become one of the most powerful, stressful, and least understood occupations in the nation” (p. xxiii).

Steinberg’s interest in undergraduate admissions stemmed from his own query concerning his admission to his “dream college,” Dartmouth, years ago: “How had I managed to get in, when so many others had not” (p. xi)? This question led Steinberg to cover the world of college admissions, and he sought out admissions officers willing to let him observe the admissions process. Due to the private nature of collegiate admissions, Steinberg was rebuffed at several colleges, but successfully persuaded the staff at Wesleyan to allow him access to the process of creating the class of 2003. Specifically, Steinberg follows the life of Ralph Figueroa, an eight-year veteran of the admissions profession. His intensive shadowing of Figueroa shapes the majority of The Gatekeepers.

Early in the book, readers learn of Figueroa’s strong familial ties to education and community service. They also gain a perspective on Figueroa’s close friendship with Sharon Merrow, a guidance counselor at Harvard-Westlake, one the nation’s most prestigious prep schools. The discussion of their friendship foreshadows the professional challenges college admissions brings to their personal relationship over the course of the year. There are interesting vignettes of Figueroa in action at college fairs, working to establish personal relationships in order to recruit top students to Wesleyan.

The countervailing perspective to Figueroa’s in The Gatekeepers is provided through Steinberg’s periodic, yet probing, reporting of the lives of six Wesleyan applicants. Julianna Bates is an academically stellar student-artist at Harvard-Westlake with an ethnic background that many colleges find compelling — she is both African American and Latina. Figueroa has been recruiting Julianna since her freshman year of high school. Another Harvard-Westlake student, Becca Jannol, takes a risk in her essay by detailing the ethical lessons she learned after eating a marijuana-laced brownie, hoping that her integrity and strong record of leadership will land her a spot in a selective college, like Wesleyan. Mig Pensoneau, a student from the Midwest who initially catches Figueroa’s attention through his extensive knowledge of film trivia, turns out to be a serious student committed to his academics at a Native American charter school after an unspectacular three years in Minnesota. Jordan Goldman is an aspiring writer with well-placed connections who initially has his mind set on attending Brown and little else. Aggie Ramirez, a New York City student from a working-class family, strikes a chord with Figueroa. Despite her low class rank, she flourishes at a Maryland preparatory school, becoming one of the first Latina campus leaders the school had ever had. Finally, Tiffany Wang is a student with stellar test scores and a comprehensive extracurricular activities portfolio that does little to impress Figueroa; however, we later learn that her letter-writing to prisoners on death row, something she never mentions in her applications, makes her stand out.

Steinberg’s portrayal of Ralph Figueroa and his colleagues cast the admissions officers as competent, yet very human administrators. While many of the selection criteria at Wesleyan are objective measures (class rank and so forth), admissions officers are often drawn to candidates with similar histories to their own, or to those applicants who fit their interpretation of “campus leader” or “intellectually curious.” Steinberg notes that, “like fortune-tellers, the admissions officers were engaged in a task that was, in fact, anything but scientific” (p. 96).

The toll this scrutiny takes on students is evident in their personal accounts, as readers discover in the words of Becca Jannol: “I’m sorry so many kids have to go through this process. It makes you fell really bad about yourself at times” (p. 261). Interestingly, admissions officers share similar feelings when students “reject” their schools. Referring to a student who chose an Ivy League school over Wesleyan, despite Figueroa’s intervention, his close friend Sharon Merrow states:

Steinberg manages to convey that there is no “magic bullet” in elite college admissions, but proffers the advice Figueroa gives to aspiring Wesleyan students at Harvard-Westlake: “Whatever you do, don’t send me poems. . . . Don’t use gimmicks, they sometimes work. . . . Be] true to who you are . . . [rather than] write about what you think the college wants to hear” (p. 37). This point is perhaps best illustrated in the delightful story of Carter L. Bays, a student waitlisted at Wesleyan a decade ago. Dismayed that he was not admitted immediately, this student’s plan of action directly contradicted the advice Figueroa gave the students at Harvard-Westlake. Bays decided “to send [the admissions office] a postcard every day until you accept me” (p. 255). This ploy paid off for Bays, as he was eventually admitted and, appropriately, netted a job after graduation answering viewer mail for David Letterman.

Steinberg’s The Gatekeepers details the complex and sometimes idiosyncratic college admissions process and preserves the humanity of the students, staff, and their families. The gatekeepers have the unenviable yet exciting task of balancing externalities such as median SAT scores, favorable U.S. News & World Report rankings, and the desires of alumni and faculty with fulfilling the dreams of more academically capable and curious students than they have space to admit. Nevertheless, readers will walk away with an appreciation for the effort put forth by all constituents in this book.

Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis: Modeling Change and Event Occurrence
by Judith D. Singer and John B. Willett.
London: Oxford University Press, 2003. 642 pp. $65.00.

The investigation of change over time is key to empirical research in many disciplines. What factors influence growth in African American students’ academic achievement over the course of college? When and why do families leave Early Head Start? Such research questions allow for the generation of useable knowledge through empirical research. In their latest book, Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis, Judy Singer and John Willett make the case that such research questions are best answered through the collection and analysis of longitudinal data, while also providing a clear and concise tutorial on the use of two methods therein: individual growth modeling and survival analysis.

Although appropriate statistical methods for the analysis of longitudinal data were first developed during the 1980s, they have yet to be widely applied in educational and psychological research. This is unfortunately true, even when researchers make the effort to collect data at multiple time points. As Singer and Willett note, “In a review of over 50 longitudinal studies published in American Psychological Association journals in 1999, for example, we found that only four used individual growth modeling (even though many wanted to study change in a continuous outcome) and only one used survival analysis (even though many were interested in event occurrence)” (p. vii). By not making use of these methods in their work, researchers limit the kinds of effects that they are able to detect statistically, as well as the kinds of quantitative research questions they can ask.

It is likely that inattention to appropriate statistical methods for longitudinal data analysis in most popular applied statistical textbooks and the highly technical nature of the books that are available on these topics have contributed to their scant use in social science research. Singer and Willett tackle this problem head-on in two ways. First, they explain individual growth modeling and survival analysis step-by-step using real data. Such an approach makes these complex longitudinal analysis techniques understandable. Second, they explicitly and specifically target their tutorial for “our professional colleagues (and their students) who are comfortable with traditional statistical methods but who have yet to fully exploit these longitudinal approaches” (p. viii). In this way, Singer and Willett enter into “a structured conversation among colleagues” (p. viii) about the application of these methods instead of a complex technical discussion.

Singer and Willett divide their book into two main sections. The first section covers individual growth modeling (a special case of multilevel modeling). This methodology allows for the analysis of a continuous outcome, like heart rate or SAT score, and can include time as a predictor. Using this technique, researchers can ask and answer questions about how a particular variable changes over time and what factors are associated with that change. The second section covers survival analysis (otherwise known as event history analysis and hazard modeling in the literature). This methodology allows for the analysis of the occurrence of a specific event or dichotomous outcome, like drug abuse relapse or dropping out of an intervention program. In contrast to individual growth modeling, survival analysis allows the researcher to examine time as an outcome. For example, using this technique, one could investigate what factors are associated with whether and when divorce occurs; the occurrence of the event, divorce, in the context of time is the outcome.

Although the book is divided into two sections, it is important to note that Singer and Willett discuss growth modeling and survival analysis within a single framework to encourage the use of both methods by researchers in answering different longitudinal questions within the same study. Key ideas in data analysis are emphasized in both sections of the book, including the identification of appropriate research questions, the selection of sound methods of estimation, as well as the precise interpretation and presentation of results. To make these key ideas salient, the authors use real data donated by researchers across many disciplines (i.e., psychology, education, public health, and sociology) to demonstrate each method and to illustrate the interpretation of their findings in some detail.

In sum, Singer and Willett make complex statistical techniques understandable and useable through the use of “real data” examples, by emphasizing key ideas, and by applying a conversational tone. Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis has the potential to encourage researchers to ask longitudinal questions and then employ appropriate statistical techniques to begin answering them.

Harvard Education Publishing Group

Publishers of Harvard Educational Review, Harvard Education Letter and Harvard Education Press books
Harvard Graduate School of Education | Harvard University
Contact us at: 8 Story Street, 1st Floor, Cambridge, MA USA 02138
Phone: 617-495-3432 | Fax: 617-496-3584 | Email: hepg@harvard.edu
HEPG Permissions Policy | HGSE Publishing Policies and Disclaimers
Last updated: April 29, 2004 | Questions or comments about the site: hepg@harvard.edu
Copyright © 2004 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College

Summer 2004 Issue

Article Abstracts:

Summer 2004 Reviews of Current Books (Full-Text)

Harvard Educational Review
Summer 2004 Article Abstracts:

Harvard Educational Review
Summer 2004 Reviews of Current Books
(Full Text)

Harvard Education Publishing Group

Summer 2004 Issue

Article Abstracts:

Summer 2004 Reviews of Current Books (Full-Text)

Harvard Educational Review Summer 2004 Article Abstracts:

Harvard Educational Review Summer 2004 Reviews of Current Books (Full Text)

Harvard Education Publishing Group

Harvard Educational Review
Summer 2004 Article Abstracts:

Harvard Educational Review
Summer 2004 Reviews of Current Books
(Full Text)