I agree with Dan. i'd save 'important' for cases when u are building some
one up before u lower the boom. You're confirming their resilt so saying it is
important is like being imodest about yout own work. (its always a fine line of course).
Also, use 'paper' not 'article' to describe your work. An article is
a published paper.
And for everyone: pls don't forget to reread the 'publication,
publication' paper about now. There are a lot of little things in there, all
designed to make your papers better...
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Hopkins <dhopkins(a)fas.harvard.edu
Date: Monday, May 8, 2006 7:52 am
Subject: Re: [gov2001-l] It's not About Race at K - revised abstract
This is a very nice abstract. I might think about modifying your subtitle to give
yourself a bit more independence from Fryer and Levitt--and to elaborate a bit on exactly
how you contribute, since you have more data and new findings to offer.
Also, others might disagree with this, but I think that you should avoid characterizing
others' contributions as being "important" or not.
Instead, I'd stick to the facts, and let the reader decide what is
important. In this case, I might say "Fryer and Levitt (2004), using data from a
nationally representative sample of students in kindergarten and first grade, demonstrate
that the disparity in academic achievement
between blacks and whites only begins after students arrive in school, after controlling
for a small set of socioeconomic, family and health related characteristics." Your
first two sentences have already convinced me that the topic is important...
Best,
Dan
On Mon, 8 May 2006, Elena Llaudet wrote:
Good night everybody,
Below is our revised abstract. Comments and
criticisms are welcome.
Elena & Omar
It's not About Race at K:
Confirming and
Extending Fryer & Levitt's Understanding of the
Black-White Test Score Gap
by Elena Llaudet and Omar Wasow* *
Although more than half a century has passed since the
landmark /Brown
v. Board of Ed./ decision, black children continue to lag
academically
behind their white peers. For decades, research comparing the test
scores of black and white students has consistently found a substantial
gap, even among four-year olds. Fryer and Levitt (2004), using data from
a nationally representative sample of students in kindergarten and first
grade, broke important ground when demonstrating that the disparity in
academic achievement between blacks and whites only begins after
students arrive in school, after controlling for a small set of
socioeconomic, family and health related characteristics. In this
article, we demonstrate the robustness of their results, expand their
analysis through fifth grade, and analyze the evolution of the gap in
the first six years of school with a model more appropriate for studying
cross-sectional and longitudinal data. We find that the divergence in
black and white test scores continues to grow after first grade,
although at a slower rate for math and at a similar rate for reading.
_______________________________________________
gov200