Public Policy Memo
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Notre Dame *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
2320
Subject
Communications
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
6
Uploaded by chocovenny
My background paragraph was altered to include more relevant data and empirical evidence to
support the necessitation of the problem I brought into question. One major change that to a great extent
helped me to narrow my focus of my memo was altering my problem statement to make the achievement
gap I was discussing to be specifically the concurrent gaps in AP course enrollment. I also diagnosed the
causes of my specified achievement gap to disparities in the socioeconomic statuses of students.
The evaluative criteria portion of my memo was cut down to be more concise and impactful
through divisions with subheaders rather than writing an entire paragraph. My criteria was also changed
to be the four factors of financial cost, political feasibility, enrollment, and equity. This helped to address
my previous confusion with the efficiency and effectiveness of the policy as my criteria now is more
distinct and defined.
My policy alternative paragraphs changed in formatting to be more clear with the addition of
headings for each policy alternative. Furthermore, within each policy alternative I went through the
criteria and gave a rank to the policy in each one of the four factors of criteria I previously established. I
also justified each ranking of the policy in its respective criteria while also addressing why certain
policies scored more or less in certain categories. All of my alternatives this time shared the collective
goal of increasing enrollment of underrepresented students from socioeconomic groups in AP course
enrollment. Also I included more evidence to tie my alternatives back to my recommendation.
Finally, my recommendation paragraph was changed to include a prediction to how the
implementation of the policy alternative would progress along with how efficient it would be in
comparison to other policies.
To:
Secretary of Education Aimee Rogstad Guidera
From:Date:
Subject:
Achievement Gaps created by Disparities in AP Class Enrollment
Executive Summary:
The socioeconomic status of an individual should be absolutely independent of the quality of
education a student receives. Yet, this status conversely creates and dictates the adverse, institutional-wide
achievement imbalances students face today. In a country as developed as the United States, the lack of
prioritization to address this inequity is unjustifiable and must immediately be resolved. The criteria that
will be used to analyze the policy will be financial cost, political feasibility, enrollment, and equity. The
alternatives this criteria will be judged against are the implementation of mandatory higher-level
curriculums within schools, financial aid to cover AP exam fees for economically disadvantaged groups,
and the creation of discussion groups centered around educating teachers on equity and how they can
individually support disenfranchised students. I suggest the implementation of mandatory higher-level
curriculums within schools as it has the highest score when put through an outcome matrix with the other
alternatives and criteria, thereby making it the most suitable for addressing achievement gaps in AP class
enrollment elicited by socioeconomic inequities.
Background:
Achievement gaps between students of varying socioeconomic backgrounds are pervasive market
failures of inequality. Minorities are highly underrepresented in higher-level AP courses and the
associated doors such courses open for post-secondary academic opportunity, a key determinant of a
student’s upward mobility later in life. According to a study, Black students, who make up nearly 22
percent of the state’s high schoolers, are generally underrepresented in AP classes, with just 12.7 percent
of total enrollment. Furthermore, non-disadvantaged Black students make up 7.3 percent of AP
enrollment, while low-income Black students make up only 5.4 percent (Masters 2021). The roots of this
inequity fall primarily to the failure of proper resource allocation to disenfranchised groups by both
school systems and the state government.
The lack of pre-highschool access to advanced, quality
education has prodigious ramifications on future education attainment and opportunity,
exemplified with economically disadvantaged students being four times less likely to take AP
courses (18.7%) compared to non-economically disadvantaged students (81.3%) (Siegel-Hawley
2021); denying educational access to individuals of certain socioeconomic statuses is contradictory
and hypocritical in a country that continues to pride itself for its “equality in opportunity”.
Additionally, it is important to note that the benefits of AP course enrollment are boundless. Numerous
studies have provided empirical evidence suggesting AP students outperform their non-AP peers in
various academic achievement measures such as ACT and SAT scores, college attendance rates,
admission to selective colleges, college GPAs, college graduation rates, and time to degree completion
(Xu, Solanki, Fink 2020). Disenfranchised students thereby experience large disparities in postsecondary
education and opportunities as a result of their disparities in AP course enrollment.
Evaluative Criteria:
The success and proliferation of the policy alternatives listed later in this memo are dependent on
four factors: financial cost, political feasibility, enrollment, and equity. All policy alternatives will be
evaluated by each criteria on a scale of 1-5 where 1 is the lowest of the criteria in question and 5 is the
highest.
Cost feasibility: This will be evaluated based on the percentage of budget within the overall budget the
policy requires.
Political feasibility: This will be analyzed based on if the policies are likely to be supported and enacted
by school boards following implementation.
Effectiveness: This will be considered based on the total overall increase in enrollment within AP courses.
This will be important in considering the efficacy of the policy
Equity: This will be evaluated on the overall increase in enrollment in disenfranchised groups. These
groups are considered to be students that are economically disadvantaged and are a part of free lunch and
federal aid programs and/or are racially/ethnically underrepresented in AP course enrollment (Black and
Latinx students).
Policy Alternatives:
Alternative 1: Enrolling all Students into Higher Level Academic Course Path
This policy alternative eliminates the lowest academic track in schools both pre-high school and
during high school, ultimately enrolling all students within Virginia to higher level coursework.
In terms of financial cost, this alternative ranks at a 2 as its most prominent cost comes from
retraining teachers to teaching the new, rigorous curriculums. However, these costs can be covered by
grants given by the Every Student Succeeds Act. The grants are designed to meet needs for historically
underrepresented students and widen the academic resources available to them by providing funds with
flexible use to school boards (Aspen Institute 2022). Furthermore, the grants can act as a selective
incentive to motivate school boards to enforce this policy, as it requires schools to both participate in
robust data reporting of student enrollment and display commitment to improve underperforming schools
(Aspen Institute 2022). This incentive is displayed to work efficiently in Chicago Public Schools where
the previously impossible feat of implementing a standard in higher level coursework was made possible
through the presentation of grants offered by the ESSA. Using the grants, the CPS was able to add 22 new
schools to its IB network, a network highly comparable to AP coursework. Seven of these high schools
became what is known as ‘wall-to-wall’ IB high schools because all students have access to some part of
the IB Programme even before taking IB courses, thus reducing entrance barriers and within-school
disparities in access to rigorous coursework (Aspen Institute 2022). Therefore, it is clear that not only will
this policy rank high in political feasibility at around 4, it also ranks high in equity with a score of 5. This
policy also ranks a 5 in effectiveness as the rigorous curriculum students are put in explicitly equip
students with the ability and confidence necessary to later enroll in AP courses. The enrollment in AP
courses would become a natural progression in their education and concurrently will increase the overall
enrollment of students in AP courses. Arkansas, which employs this policy alternative of a mandatory
higher level academic course path, is a state with one of the highest AP enrollments of underrepresented
students in the country (AP Report-College Board, 2013). It can be extrapolated that Virginia schools will
experience a similar success to both Arkansas and Chicago public schools if this policy alternative is
employed.
Alternative 2: Providing Financial Support for AP Exam Fees
This policy focuses on expanding AP exam access with financial support for the exam fees of
economically disadvantaged students.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
The financial cost of this program is ranked at a 3 as subsidies must be provided by the
government to cover the expensive exam fees past the free quota already offered by schools. Again, the
grants provided by the ESSA can be used to cover some part of the testing fees as the program guarantees
flexibility for the state to use the money in ways they think are most likely to benefit underserved
students. The political feasibility of this alternative is at a 3. While this policy would improve the
academic attainment of students and the community as a whole, it is difficult to set standards on what the
state considers to be truly underprivileged. This inefficiency appears with the exam fee reduction the
college board already presents, with students having to complete lengthy applications to prove that they
are disenfranchised only to end up with a low possibility to receive the funds even after having their
applications evaluated (Zinth 2016). Different agencies, from parents to school boards, will have varying
views on who truly needs fee exemption thus creating strong discord throughout the policy
implementation process. In terms of effectiveness, this policy ranks at a 5. Indubitably this alternative will
serve to increase the AP course enrollment of economically disadvantaged students who were previously
dissuaded by the fact that they were unable to afford AP exam fees. This is also presented in Arkansas
which pays for the exam fees of disenfranchised students and in turn reports higher AP enrollment and
test taking of economically disadvantaged students (AP Report-College Board, 2013).The equity score of
this alternative however is a 2. Although the policy does open educational access to economically
disadvantaged students, it fails to account for the racial disparity induced AP enrollment gaps created by
historical segregation of minorities into poor quality schools. The absence of experienced teachers and
rigorous coursework implicitly leads to students placing less emphasis on pursuing higher level education
in AP courses regardless of fee waiverment (Siegely-Hawley 2021). This is exemplified with Latinx
students of low economic status reporting no difference in their AP enrollment to more privileged Latinx
students as both exhibit enrollment percentages of 4.5% (Siegely-Hawley 2021).
Alternative 3: Teachers Participating in Professional-Led Discussion Groups Regarding Educational
Inequities
This policy centers around creating regularly scheduled staff discussion groups regarding current
socioeconomic inequities within their own respective schools to ultimately inform them on what they can
do to alleviate the impact of these inequities on the quality of education they provide. The policy will
involve teaching critical race theory to educators and its resounding implications for higher course
enrollment disparities.
The financial cost of the policy alternative is ranked at a 3, as the only cost arising from these
discussion groups is hiring a qualified leader to direct the critical reading/inequity awareness training. The
political feasibility of this policy is incredibly low at a ranking of 1 predominantly due to prior negative
responses to the teaching of critical race theory in public schools. This is reflected in the
Williamsburg-James Public Schools. Because of the irrational fear parents had towards critical race theory
(CRT) “corrupting” the minds of their kids (Knowles 2022), the board ultimately decided to not update
their decade old history textbooks to be more racially sensitive and include key components of CRT. For
these reasons, it's likely that it would be incredibly difficult to pass an education program involving CRT
through the policy process due to the presence of numerous dissenting stakeholders including parents and
school board members. The policy receives a ranking of 4 in terms of effectiveness. Building a strong
support system with teachers who empathize with the constant adversities disenfranchised students face in
school consequently increases the confidence these students have in themselves. Thereby, the students are
more likely to engage in challenging classes such as AP courses with their newfound self reassurance.
This has been clear to work as exemplified by a case study on white suburban teachers who were
educated about racial inequities faced by their students in the academic sphere. At the end of the case
study, teachers were better able to care for and provide a support system for their underserved students
which correlated to an increase in student willingness to participate and engage in class material (Yoon
2012). This alternative therefore receives a high equity ranking of 4. However, this policy first requires
full understanding in all the educators before its effects are truly seen. The implementation of this policy
will therefore take a longer time to produce equitable AP enrollment percentages thus preventing the
alternative’s equity and effectiveness scores from being a complete 5.
Recommendation:
Policy alternative one is most suitable for addressing the gaps in AP enrollment
instigated by socioeconomic disparities. Alternative one has the highest average in the ranking of its
criteria of 4, in comparison to that of alt. two, 3.25, and that of alt. three, 3. This signifies that alternative
one best satisfies the criteria set by this memo while also most comprehensively addring the foundations
of inequity within the lack of resources available to students of different socioeconomic status. This
policy ranks low in financial cost compared to both policy alternatives 2 and 3 due to its nature of
restructuring the education systems of every public school and retraining all teachers to administer more
rigorous curriculums. But in terms of political feasibility and effectiveness ,which will be the largest
determinants in the success of a policy through the policy process, alternative one ranks first. This is due
to the empirical evidence found within states such as Arkansas, of which successfully implemented
higher-level curriculums both pre-high school and during highschool, and Chicago, which used grants in
the form of selective incentives to solve discord within agencies and ultimately increase the academic
attainment of many disenfranchised students. Furthermore, alternative 1 ranks highest in the most
important criteria, equity. Unlike alternative 2 which does not account for racial disparity and alternative 3
which will take a longer time to implement fully, this alternative will work best to effectively and
efficiently dissolve both disparities found in AP enrollment and future achievement gaps as students will
be better equipped with tools to face postsecondary education because of their experience in prior higher
level coursework. The first step in implementation is to talk and convince school boards to participate and
enforce higher level coursework in their schools. This will be difficult as it requires a major shift in the
structure of many schools but the incentive of grants and the presence of teacher entrepreneurs within
these schools who individually want to see positive change within their classrooms will help to ease and
accelerate the process. Parents, key members in changing the minds of school boards, will be on the side
of the policy alternative as it increases the educational access previously unavailable to their children and
thus increases both their and their children’s chances of upward mobility. Gaining the support of these
particular agencies will be vital in pushing the policy past implementation and allow it to begin resolving
the market failures of inequality found in achievement gaps.
Works Cited
Increasing access to advanced coursework - Aspen Institute. (n.d.). Retrieved April 26, 2022, from
https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ESSA-IncreasingAccesstoAdvancedCo
ursework.pdf
U.S. Department of Education Emphasizes Importance of Full-Service Community Schools Through
Competitive Grant Program
. U.S. Department of Education. (2022, January 11). Retrieved from
https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-emphasizes-importance-full-servi
ce-community-schools-through-competitive-grant-program
The 10th annual AP report to the nation - college board
. (2013). Retrieved April 5, 2022, from
https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/ap/rtn/10th-annual/10th-annual-ap-report-
state-supplement-pennsylvania.pdf
Kate Masters, V. M. A. 28. (2021, April 28).
Black and low-income students are underrepresented in
Virginia AP classes, report finds
. Virginia Mercury. Retrieved April 4, 2022, from
https://www.virginiamercury.com/2021/04/28/black-and-low-income-students-are-underrepresented
-in-virginia-ap-classes-report-finds/#:~:text=Black%20students%2C%20who%20make%20up,mak
e%20up%20only%205.4%20percent
.
Siegel-Hawley, G., Taylor, K., & Kimberly Bridges. (2021, April).
Segregation within Schools: Unequal
Access to AP Courses by Race and Economic Status in Virginia
. Center for Education and Civil
Rights. Retrieved April 4, 2022, from
https://cecr.ed.psu.edu/news/school-district-secessions-accelerate-school-segregation
Xiu, D., Solanki, S., & Fink, J. (n.d.).
College acceleration for all? mapping racial gaps in ...
American
Enterprise Institute. Retrieved April 26, 2022, from
https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/college-acceleration-for-all-mapping-racial-gaps-in-ad
vanced-placement-and-dual-enrollment-participation/
Yoon, I. (n.d.).
Search form
. The paradoxical nature of whiteness-at-work in the daily life of schools and
teacher communities | Scholars Portal Journals. Retrieved April 25, 2022, from
https://journals.scholarsportal.info/details/13613324/v15i0005/587_tpnowilosatc.xml&sub=all
Zinth, 2016. (n.d.).
Policy focus in: Study up on analysis - ecs.org
. Advanced Placement: Model policy
components. Retrieved April 5, 2022, from
http://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/AP-Model-Policy-Components.pdf
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help