Cited by 98School Choice and PerformanceUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation StudiesCritical Race Theory in Education

Racial Segregation and the Black-White Test Score Gap

Open access
Card, David, Rothstein, Jesse·2006·National Bureau of Economic Research

Abstract

Racial segregation is often blamed for some of the achievement gap between blacks and whites.We study the effects of school and neighborhood segregation on the relative SAT scores of black students across different metropolitan areas, using large microdata samples for the 1998-2001 test cohorts.Our models include detailed controls for the family background of individual test-takers, school-level controls for selective participation in the test, and city-level controls for racial composition, income, and region.We find robust evidence that the black-white test score gap is higher in more segregated cities. Holding constant family background and other factors, a shift from a fully segregated to a completely integrated city closes about one-quarter of the raw black-white gap in SAT scores.Specifications that distinguish between school and neighborhood segregation suggest that neighborhood segregation has a consistently negative impact but that school segregation has no independent effect (though we cannot reject equality of the two effects).We find similar results using Census-based data on schooling outcomes for youth in different cities.Data on enrollment in honors courses suggest that within-school segregation increases when schools are more highly integrated, potentially offsetting the benefits of school desegregation and accounting for our findings.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3386/w12078

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Card, D., & Rothstein, J.
Affiliations
National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Venue
National Bureau of Economic Research
Published
2006-03
OpenAlex
W3024028631
Cited by
92
References
34
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Race Theory in Education
Keywords
racial segregation, school segregation, residential segregation, Black-White achievement gap, SAT scores, school desegregation, school integration, family background, metropolitan areas

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review