Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Measuring racial educational disparities over time amongst top achievers

Nature volume 639, pages 976–984 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Educational disparities remain a key contributor to increasing social and wealth inequalities. To address this, researchers and policymakers have focused on average differences between racial groups or differences among students who are falling behind1. This focus potentially leads to educational triage, diverting resources away from high-achieving students, including those from racial minorities2,3. Here we focus on the ‘racial excellence gap’—the difference in the likelihood that students from racial minorities (Black and Hispanic) reach the highest levels of academic achievement compared with their non-minority (white and Asian) peers. There is a shortage of evidence that systematically measures the magnitude of the excellence gap and how it evolves4,5. Using longitudinal, statewide, administrative data, we document eight facts regarding the excellence gap from third grade (typically ages 8–9) to high school (typically ages 14–18), link the stability of excellence gaps and student backgrounds, and assess the efficacy of public policies. We show that excellence gaps in maths and reading are evident by the third grade and grow slightly over time, especially for female students. About one third of the gap is explained by a student’s socioeconomic status, and about one tenth is explained by the school environment. Top-achieving racial minority students are also less likely to persist in excellence as they progress through school. Moreover, state accountability policies that direct additional resources to reduce non-race-based inequality6 had minimal effects on the racial excellence gaps. Documenting these patterns is an important step towards eliminating excellence gaps and removing the ‘racial glass ceiling’.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Racial excellence gaps from third to eighth grade.
Fig. 2: Excellence gaps across schools.
Fig. 3: Effect of Focus designations on excellence gaps.
Fig. 4: Eighth grade excellence by third grade rank.
Fig. 5: Excellence in college readiness.
Fig. 6: Explaining racial differences in persistence and entry of excellence.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

This research used data structured and maintained by the MERI–Michigan Education Data Center (MEDC). MEDC data are modified for analysis purposes using rules governed by MEDC and are not identical to those data collected and maintained by the Michigan Department of Education (MDE) and/or Michigan’s Center for Educational Performance and Information (CEPI). Results, information and opinions solely represent the analysis, information and opinions of the authors and are not endorsed by, or reflect the views or positions of, grantors, MDE and CEPI or any employee thereof. Researchers interested in accessing these data can submit a request to MEDC through https://medc.miedresearch.org. There are no constraints to submit a proposal.

Code availability

Code used in this paper will be publicly available at https://www.openicpsr.org/openicpsr/project/215681/version/V1/view.

References

  1. Hanushek, E. A., Peterson, P. E., Talpey, L. M. & Woessmann, L. The achievement gap fails to close. Educ. Next 19, 8–17 (2019).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Gillborn, D. & Youdell, D. Rationing Education: Policy, Practice, Reform, and Equity (McGraw-Hill Education, 1999).

  3. Neal, D. & Schanzenbach, D. W. Left behind by design: proficiency counts and test-based accountability. Rev. Econ. Stat. 92, 263–283 (2010).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Plucker, J. A., Burroughs, N. & Song, R. Mind the (Other) Gap! The Growing Excellence Gap in K-12 Education (Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, Indiana Univ., 2010).

  5. Rambo-Hernandez, K. E., Peters, S. J. & Plucker, J. A. Quantifying and exploring elementary school excellence gaps across schools and time. J. Adv. Acad. 30, 383–415 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hemelt, S. W. & Jacob, B. A. How does an accountability program that targets achievement gaps affect student performance? Educ. Finance Policy 15, 45–74 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kober, N. It Takes More than Testing: Closing the Achievement Gap. A Report of the Center on Education Policy (Center on Education Policy, 2001).

  8. Williams, B. Closing the Achievement Gap: A Vision for Changing Beliefs and Practices (ASCD, 1996).

  9. Ladson-Billings, G. From the achievement gap to the education debt: understanding achievement in us schools. Educ. Res. 35, 3–12 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Magnuson, K. A. & Waldfogel, J. Early childhood care and education: effects on ethnic and racial gaps in school readiness. Future Child. 15, 169–196 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Darling-Hammond, L. Race, inequality and educational accountability: the irony of ‘no child left behind’. Race Ethn. Educ. 10, 245–260 (2007).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Gamoran, A. Standards-Based Reform and the Poverty Gap: Lessons for “No Child Left Behind” (Brookings Institution Press, 2008).

  13. Murnane, R. J. Improving the education of children living in poverty. Future Child. 17, 161–182 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Paige, R. No Child Left Behind: The ongoing movement for public education reform. Harvard Educ. Rev. 76, 461–473 (2006).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Booher-Jennings, J. Below the bubble: “educational triage” and the Texas accountability system. Am. Educ. Res. J. 42, 231–268 (2005).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Wyner, J. S., Bridgeland, J. M. & DiIulio Jr, J. J. Achievementrap: How America is Failing Millions of High-achieving Students from Lower-Income Families (Civic Enterprises, 2007).

  17. Hoxby, C. M. & Avery, C. The Missing “One-offs”: The Hidden Supply of High-Achieving, Low Income Students (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2013).

  18. Meinck, S. & Brese, F. Trends in gender gaps: using 20 years of evidence from TIMSS. Large Scale Assess. Educ. 7, 8 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Plucker, J., Hardesty, J. & Burroughs, N. Talent on the Sidelines: Excellence Gaps and America’s Persistent Talent Underclass (Center for Education Policy Analysis, Univ. of Connecticut, 2013).

  20. Guryan, J., Hurst, E. & Kearney, M. Parental education and parental time with children. J. Econ. Perspect. 22, 23–46 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hanushek, E. A. & Rivkin, S. G. Harming the best: how schools affect the black-white achievement gap. J. Pol. Anal. Manag. 28, 366–393 (2009).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Meyer, M. S., Shen, Y. & Plucker, J. A. Reducing excellence gaps: a systematic review of research on equity in advanced education. Rev. Educ. Res. 94, 33–72 (2024).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Plucker, J. A., Peters, S. J. & Schmalensee, S. Reducing excellence gaps: a research-based model. Gifted Child Today 40, 245–250 (2017).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Plucker, J. A. & Peters, S. J. Excellence Gaps in Education: Expanding Opportunities for Talented Students (Harvard Education Press, 2020).

  25. Kim, J., Watkins, S. & Yoon, S. W. Social justice alert: future innovators and leaders fall behind in academic achievement. Educ. Leader. Rev. 17, 129–141 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hamilton, R. et al. Disentangling the roles of institutional and individual poverty in the identification of gifted students. Gifted Child Q. 62, 6–24 (2018).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Kaul, C. R. & Davis, B. K. How the state education agencies addressed gifted education in the title II sections of their ESSA state plans. Gifted Child Today 41, 159–167 (2018).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Hodges, J. & Lamb, K. Washington’s high-ability programs during the no child left behind era. J. Educ. Gifted 42, 283–302 (2019).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Peters, S. J., Gentry, M., Whiting, G. W. & McBee, M. T. Who gets served in gifted education? demographic representation and a call for action. Gifted Child Q. 63, 273–287 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Turner, E. O. & Spain, A. K. The multiple meanings of (in)equity: remaking school district tracking policy in an era of budget cuts and accountability. Urban Educ. 55, 783–812 (2020).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Mun, R. U., Ezzani, M. D., Lee, L. E. & Ottwein, J. K. Building systemic capacity to improve identification and services in gifted education: a case study of one district. Gifted Child Q. 65, 132–152 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lockhart, K., Meyer, M. S. & Crutchfield, K. A content analysis of selected state plans for gifted and talented education. J. Adv. Acad. 33, 3–42 (2022).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. List, J. A. Non est Disputandum de Generalizability? A Glimpse Into the External Validity Trial (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020).

  34. Hyman, J. Act for all: the effect of mandatory college entrance exams on postsecondary attainment and choice. Educ. Fin. Pol. 12, 281–311 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fryer, R. G. & Levitt, S. D. Testing for racial differences in the mental ability of young children. Am. Econ. Rev. 103, 981–1005 (2013).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. List, J. A., Pernaudet, J. & Suskind, D. L. Shifting parental beliefs about child development to foster parental investments and improve school readiness outcomes. Nat. Commun. 12, 1367–1378 (2021).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Bond, T. N. & Lang, K. The black-white education scaled test-score gap in grades K-7. J. Hum. Resour. 53, 891–917 (2018).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Gelbach, J. B. When do covariates matter? and which ones, and how much? J. Labor Econ. 34, 509–543 (2016).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Autor, D., Figlio, D., Karbownik, K., Roth, J. & Wasserman, M. Males at the tails: how socioeconomic status shapes the gender gap. Econ. J. 133, 3136–3152 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Jackson, C. K. & Mackevicius, C. L. What impacts can we expect from school spending policy? evidence from evaluations in the United States. Am. Econ. J. 16, 412–446 (2024).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Reardon, S. F., Kalogrides, D. & Shores, K. The geography of racial/ethnic test score gaps. Am. J. Sociol. 124, 1164–1221 (2019).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Hemelt, S. W. & Jacob, B. Differentiated Accountability and Education Production: Evidence from NCLB Waivers (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2017).

  43. Cattaneo, M. D., Jansson, M. & Ma, X. Simple local polynomial density estimators. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 115, 1449–1455 (2020).

    Article  MathSciNet  CAS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Hess, F. M. & Rotherham, A. J. Can NCLB survive the competitiveness competition? Sch. Bus. Aff. 74, 8 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Card, D. & Giuliano, L. Universal screening increases the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 13678–13683 (2016).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Assouline, S. G., Ihrig, L. M. & Mahatmya, D. Closing the excellence gap: investigation of an expanded talent search model for student selection into an extracurricular stem program in rural middle schools. Gifted Child Q. 61, 250–261 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ihrig, L. M., Lane, E., Mahatmya, D. & Assouline, S. G. Stem excellence and leadership program: increasing the level of stem challenge and engagement for high-achieving students in economically disadvantaged rural communities. J. Educ. Gifted 41, 24–42 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Calonico, S., Cattaneo, M. D., Farrell, M. H. & Titiunik, R. rdrobust: Software for regression-discontinuity designs. Stata J. 17, 372–404 (2017).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Calonico, S., Cattaneo, M. D. & Titiunik, R. Robust nonparametric confidence intervals for regression-discontinuity designs. Econometrica 82, 2295–2326 (2014).

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Hartman, E. Equivalence testing for regression discontinuity designs. Polit. Anal. 29, 505–521 (2021).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. White, R. & DeGrow, B. A Survey of Michigan’s Private Education Sector. A Mackinac Center Report (ERIC, 2016).

  52. List, J. A., Shaikh, A. M. & Vayalinkal, A. Multiple testing with covariate adjustment in experimental economics. J. Appl. Econometrics 38, 920–939 (2023).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  53. Kline, P., Rose, E. K. & Walters, C. R. Systemic discrimination among large US employers. Q. J. Econ. 137, 1963–2036 (2022).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Hartman, E. RDD equivalence test. Github https://github.com/ekhartman/rdd_equivalence/blob/master/RDD_equivalence_functions.R?raw=TRUE (2020).

  55. Cattaneo, M. D., Idrobo, N. & Titiunik, R. A Practical Introduction to Regression Discontinuity Designs: Foundations (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2019).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank D. Neal and P. Peña for helpful comments; S. Hemelt and B. Jacob for sharing their code; G. Barcelo, C. Brobst, J. Cipriano, Z. El-Kaissi, B. Hammer, A. Listo, A. Mryan, F. Pagnotta, L. Ramirez, S. Shi, R. Sharma, C. Smith and J. Wang for research assistance with the literature review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Uditi Karna

  2. Department of Economics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Min Sok Lee, John A. List & Haruka Uchida

  3. Research School of Economics, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

    John A. List

  4. NBER, Cambridge, MA, USA

    John A. List

  5. Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy, University of Virgina, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Andrew Simon

Authors
  1. Uditi Karna
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Min Sok Lee
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John A. List
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew Simon
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Haruka Uchida
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

J.A.L., M.S.L. and H.U. conceived the research questions and acquired the data. U.K., J.A.L., A.S. and H.U. formulated the methodological approach, and U.K., A.S. and H.U. analysed the data. U.K., A.S., J.A.L. and H.U. wrote the manuscript. The authors are listed in alphabetical order.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to John A. List or Haruka Uchida.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature thanks Aline Bütikofer, Jonathan Plucker, Ariella Spitzer and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 Percentage change in excellence gap from 3rd grade.

This figure displays the percentage change in this difference between minority status in reaching excellence, relative to the difference in the 3rd grade. Excellence is defined as reaching the top decile on the math statewide standardized exam, MEAP for all years until 2014 and M-STEP for all years after 2014. Analysis uses our main sample, as defined in Methods, which consists of 534,122 students in total: 136,137 classified as a racial minority and 397,985 as a non-minority. Error bars reflect 95% confidence intervals around the mean.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Excellence gaps by gender.

These figures show for female and male students the proportion of each minority group that reaches excellence in (a) math and (b) reading. Analysis uses our main sample, as defined in Methods, which consists of 534,122 students in total: 136,137 classified as a racial minority and 397,985 as a non-minority. Error bars reflect 95% confidence intervals around the mean.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Gaps in college readiness (AP coursework).

This figure displays (a) the percentage of each race/ethnicity group that takes at least one AP course or takes at least one STEM AP Course and (b) the Gelbach decomposition of each minority non-minority difference. “Economically disadvantaged” is an indicator for whether a student is classified as economically disadvantaged by Michigan which is defined by whether the student is determined to be eligible for free or reduced-price meals, are in households receiving food or cash assistance, are homeless, are migrant, or are in foster care. Analysis uses our high school sample, as defined in Methods, which consists of 244,750 students in total: 58,370 classified as a racial minority and 186,380 as a non-minority. Error bars reflect 95% confidence intervals around the mean.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Excellence in the SAT math section by 8th grade rank.

This figure shows the proportion of students who score in the top decile of the SAT math section nationally, and the distribution of 8th grade achievement in math for each percentile in the top 10 percent. Shaded lines around the two lines correspond to the 95% confidence intervals and shaded areas reflect the density of students at each achievement level. Analysis uses our high school sample, as defined in Methods, which consists of 244,750 students in total: 58,370 classified as a racial minority and 186,380 as a non-minority.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Explaining racial differences in persistence and entry in college readiness (AP coursework).

This figure displays the Gelbach decomposition of each minority non-minority difference in whether a student takes at least one AP course or takes at least one STEM AP Course, among students who achieved excellence in 8th grade math (for Persistence) and students who did not achieve excellence in 8th grade math (for Entry). “Economically disadvantaged” is an indicator for whether a student is classified as economically disadvantaged by Michigan which is defined by whether the student is determined to be eligible for free or reduced-price meals, are in households receiving food or cash assistance, are homeless, are migrant, or are in foster care. Analysis uses our high school sample, as defined in Methods, which consists of 244,750 students in total: 58,370 classified as a racial minority and 186,380 as a non-minority.

Extended Data Table 1 Population characteristics
Full size table
Extended Data Table 2 Predicting excellence gaps across schools
Full size table

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains 35 display items and descriptions of supplementary methods. These items analyse the gap along various dimensions (such as socioeconomic status, grade, school, individual race groups and gender), further decompose main results across the distribution of achievement, and provide additional analyses of the accountability policy and the gap across schools.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karna, U., Lee, M.S., List, J.A. et al. Measuring racial educational disparities over time amongst top achievers. Nature 639, 976–984 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08536-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08536-0

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing