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.eduDate: 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: Elena & Omar Confirming and Extending Fryer & Levitt's Understanding of the Black-White Test Score Gap by Elena Llaudet and Omar Wasow* * 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