\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Differences in Reading Skills by Ethnicity/Race for Texas High School Students: A Statewide, Multiyear Examination},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2016-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2016)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2016-01-15}
\title{Differences in Reading Skills by Ethnicity/Race for Texas High School Students: A Statewide, Multiyear Examination}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{John R.  Slate}

             \author[2]{Cynthia  Martinez-Garcia}

             \author[3]{George W.  Moore}

             \affil[1]{  Sam Houston State University}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 8 December 2015 Accepted: 2 January 2016 Published: 15 January 2016}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


Analyzed in this study was the extent to which differences were present in the reading skills of Texas high school students as a function of ethnicity/race (i.e., Asian, White, Hispanic, and Black). Archival data were obtained from the Public Education Information Management System on all Texas high school students for the 2004-2005 through the 2011-2012 school years. Statistically significant differences were present in reading skills by student ethnicity/race in all 8 school years. For all analyses, average reading scores were lower for Black students than for Asian, White, and Hispanic students. Similarly, average reading scores were lower for Hispanic students than for Asian and White students. Results were mixed for White and Asian students. Implications for policy and for practice are discussed, along with suggestions for future research. Suggestions for future research and implications for policy and practice were made.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{critical -thinking skills, ethnicity/race, exit level, literacy, reading skills.}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
lthough ethnic achievement gaps have narrowed considerably in the last one-half century, White students continue to score 0.75 standard deviations above Black and Hispanic students in reading while Asian students continue to post higher overall scores than White students on state assessments \hyperref[b32]{(Reardon, 2011}  
\section[{Literacy and Reading Skills}]{Literacy and Reading Skills}\par
Reading comprehension as a skill has noteworthy merit for students at all levels of education because it advances opportunities to learn in other subjects \hyperref[b18]{(Grimm, 2008)}. Just as improving reading skills can advance a students' progress through multiple levels of schooling, students who are not proficient readers often experience negative effects outside the classroom, as well \hyperref[b18]{(Grimm, 2008)}. Snow, Burns, and Griffin (1998) commented that students who are struggling to read at the level of their peers frequently also exhibit lower performance in other academic subjects. Benner, Nelson, Stage, and Ralston (2011) discussed less than proficient nationwide outcomes in reading and declared that "reading achievement remains a critical priority to schools" (p. 79).\par
Fuchs, Fuchs, and Kazdan (1999) noted that in secondary grade levels, little time or effort is devoted to teaching basic reading skills to students, and the achievement gap continues to exist and even get larger. \hyperref[b17]{Goldman (2012)} suggested that secondary teachers' focus on course content over skills has led to many teachers "de-emphasizing the literacy practices central to comprehending the content" (p. 93). Most secondary teachers lack the skills and resources to teach students to read effectively, but inferred that lessons created and taught by teachers should have a balance between emphasizing content knowledge and the advancement creating lessons aligned to course curriculum documents related to content standards and did not generally allocate time to provide direct instruction for basic reading skills \hyperref[b30]{(Mercer, Campbell, Miller, Mercer, \& Lane, 2000;}\hyperref[b37]{Salinger, 2003)}. \hyperref[b28]{McArdle and Hamagami (2001)} established that students who are not proficient readers are more prone to disciplinary actions and problems related to inappropriate behavior in school. Students who struggle with reading comprehension in school were more apt to drop out of school and to remain in lower wage jobs for the majority of their lives (U.S Department of  {\ref Education, 2003)}. Sadly, long-term consequences for struggling readers include poor performance in school, less motivation to read and continue learning, and less selfconfidence \hyperref[b0]{(Armbuster, Lehr, \& Osborn, 2001)}. 
\section[{III.}]{III.} 
\section[{Critical-Thinking Skills}]{Critical-Thinking Skills} 
\section[{Aloqaili}]{Aloqaili}\par
(2012) concluded that an interdependent relationship exists between students' reading comprehension abilities and their criticalthinking skills. Elder and Paul (2013) defined critical thinking as "the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it" and summed that critical thinking "attempts to reason at the highest level of quality" (p. 17). \hyperref[b48]{Wright and Slate (2015)} indicated that as reading skills and critical thinking become more central features of the learning process after elementary school grades, the achievement gap becomes more apparent. Critical-thinking skills are measured on state assessments in Grades 3-8 on only one of four reading objectives, but once students begin high school, two of the three reading objectives assess students' criticalthinking skills (Texas Education Agency Student Assessment Division, 2004).\par
Goldman (2012) proclaimed that the teacher bears the burden of refining students' critical-thinking skills.\par
Limbach and Waugh (2010) and Zabit (2010) discussed relating certain ideas, such as prior knowledge, making inferences, and critical-thinking skills to reading comprehension. \hyperref[b12]{Facione (1984}\hyperref[b13]{Facione ( , 2015) )} declared that arguments are evaluated and defended using critical-thinking skills, which is a key component of the comprehension of what one reads. \hyperref[b2]{Beck (1989)} asserted "there is no reading without reasoning" which strengthens the argument for interdependence (p. 677). Furthermore, \hyperref[b6]{Broek and Kremer (2000)} suggested that connections existed between critical thinking and making inferences which promoted increased comprehension in reading. Aloqaili (2012) summed up his research on critical thinking and the relationship to reading comprehension when he proclaimed that "comprehension itself has been seen as a criticalthinking process" (p. 38).\par
IV. 
\section[{Ethnicity}]{Ethnicity}\par
Hawley and Nieto (2010) pronounced that ethnicity/race affects learning opportunities and how students respond to classroom instruction. A common misconception, according to  {\ref Hawley and Nieto (2010)}, is that the successful instructional strategies for Asian and White students will work for Black and Hispanic students, if only those strategies are used with more frequency. Black and Hispanic students nationwide were four grade levels behind White students in academic achievement by Grade 12, a widening of the two grade level gap from Grade 4 (U.S. Department of  {\ref Education, 2000)}. \hyperref[b1]{Barnes and Slate (2014)} reported that for the academic year 2006-2007, college readiness among all students was 44.76\%, with White students being higher (53.21\%), Hispanic students being lower (37.04\%), and Black students being lowest (33.97\%).\par
Ethnic achievement gaps differ as students progress through each grade with the Black-White gap widening, the Hispanic-White gap narrowing, and the Asian-White gap closely aligned \hyperref[b26]{(Lee, 2002)}. Ang (2014) compared existing achievement gaps between Hispanic and White students and Black and White students, which originate in the early grades. Many Hispanic and Black students begin their educational career academically behind White students (Ang, 2014; \hyperref[b26]{Lee, 2002;}\hyperref[b34]{Reardon \& Galindo, 2008)}.\par
Davis-Kean and Sexton (2009) contended that Asian students have more emphasis placed on educational involvement in the home over other ethnic groups. Parents of Asian students are more involved in students' homework and attend school functions with more frequency than parents of other ethnic groups (Davis-Kean \& Sexton, 2009). Additionally, Davis-Kean and Sexton (2009) remarked that a strong predictor for student academic achievement is the level of parental involvement.\par
Reardon, Valentino, and Shores (2012) commented that the gap in reading skills between Black and White students has decreased over time, narrowing by as much as 50\% from 1970 to 2008. Since 1990, the Black-White reading gap fluctuated with a wider gap in the beginning of the 1990's decade and a slow narrowing for the next 18 years \hyperref[b26]{(Lee, 2002;}\hyperref[b36]{Reardon et al., 2012)}. Interestingly, achievement gaps between Blacks and Whites grow the most during the first six years of school \hyperref[b35]{(Reardon et al., 2013)}. Therefore a downward trend in academic achievement among Black students compared to Whites in elementary grades is followed by an upward trend in intermediate and high school grades \hyperref[b35]{(Reardon et al., 2013)}. This achievement gap widens in the early years much further than it closes in the latter years; if the gap could narrow in the early school years as opposed to widening, the chances increase for continued narrowing of the Black-White gap after completion of elementary school.  {\ref Barnes}  Hispanic students also experienced similar trends in their reading gap between themselves and White students during the 40 years prior to 2008 \hyperref[b36]{(Reardon et al., 2012)}.\par
Problems discussed by Valenzuela (1999) centered on the idea that lack of caring relationships between ethnic minority students and teaching staff, as well as the structure of educational organizations are more negatively influential than students' ethnicity/race or even socioeconomic status.  {\ref Hawley and Nieto (2010)} suggested to build trusting relationships between students of ethnic/racial minorities and staff, professional learning communities are effective to "provide the structure, shared respect, and trust needed for collaboratively addressing" the issue facing achievement (p. 70).  {\ref Hawley and Nieto (2010)} encouraged educational leaders and teachers to improve relationships and positively affect academic achievement by: (a) consistently communicating and learning about students' families, (b) becoming familiar with available community resources, and (c) engaging families about the education of their child and seek ways to provide a culturally enriching curriculum. Hildalgo, Sui, and Epstein (2004) espoused for educators to listen to the families about what they want their child's educational experience to provide.\par
Davis-Kean and Sexton (2009) commented that cultural parenting beliefs may play a factor in reading achievement among all ethnic groups. \hyperref[b4]{Bradley and Corwyn (2002)} and \hyperref[b26]{Lee (2002)} discussed difficulties analyzing differences among student academic performance by ethnicity/race. Research challenges emerged when determining if reading gaps were present related to racial/ethnic trends or socioeconomic differences between minority student groups and White student groups \hyperref[b4]{(Bradley \& Corwyn, 2002;}\hyperref[b26]{Lee, 2002)}. Factors determined by \hyperref[b26]{Lee (2002)} that also affected the ethnic achievement gap included: (a) economic status, (b) student motivation, (c) school culture and conditions, (d) alcohol or drug use, (e) crime, and (f) instructional resources. To reach and teach students of ethnic minorities more effectively,  {\ref Hawley and Nieto (2010)} suggested educators adhere to the following steps: (a) gain an understanding into how ethnic differences impact learning outcomes, (b) learn and utilize culturally responsive instructional strategies, and (c) promote social conditions on campus that support the individual needs of each student.\par
V.  
\section[{Statement of the Problem}]{Statement of the Problem} 
\section[{a) Purpose of the Study}]{a) Purpose of the Study}\par
The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which differences were present in student academic achievement in reading among Texas high school students as a function of their ethnicity/race. Specifically, each year of the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) Exit Level English Language Arts assessment data was examined separately to determine whether differences were present in academic achievement among four ethnic/racial groups (Asian, White, Hispanic, and Black). Finally, the extent to which a trend was present in reading skills among students in these four ethnic/racial groups was determined. This study will provide essential information on the differences between reading skills among student of different ethnic/racial groups (i.e., Asian, White, Hispanic, and Black).\par
Research gathered and synthesized in this study will offer educational leaders more insight into the trials they face regarding differences in student reading achievement by ethnicity/race. Ideally, these research findings could assist policymakers in local or state education agencies in their search to provide a culturally responsive and diverse educational experience for students in all ethnic/racial groups. Additional research could be beneficial regarding the variety of reading skills, from basic understanding and reading comprehension skills to higher-order critical-thinking skills, and the effect that differences in ethnicity/race has on these required skills. Conclusions from this study may create awareness related to differences that exist on high school state assessments as a function of ethnicity/race and their levels of reading skills.\par
Students of each ethnic/racial group advance from Kindergarten through Grade 12 with different expectations at each level. In the early grade levels, curriculum standards are created that promote basic reading skills and phonetic awareness \hyperref[b14]{(Feldman, 2015;}\hyperref[b24]{Joseph 2008)}. Once students move past Grade 2, learning expectations change to where students are reading to learn using basic reading skills to examine and analyze various culturally diverse texts \hyperref[b14]{(Feldman, 2015)}. During this time, many ethnic/racial differences are apparent between Hispanic and White students and between Black and White students, as reported by Ang (2014).\par
Differences in the achievement of student demographic populations are delineated by local and state education agencies using state assessment data. As students complete elementary school and move into intermediate grade levels (Grades 5-8), the expectation is that each student should be able to demonstrate basic reading comprehension skills. Those reading skills also provide opportunities for the improvement of students' thinking and processing skills. To meet the standard of the Exit Level English Language Arts exam and eventually graduate, students must demonstrate mastery of the content and skills outlined in the three TAKS Objectives for the assessment:  
\section[{Research Questions}]{Research Questions}\par
The following overarching research question was addressed in this investigation: What is the difference in the reading skills of Texas high school students as a function of ethnicity/race for the 2004-2005 school year? Specific sub questions under this overarching research question were:  
\section[{VII. ethod a) Research Design}]{VII. ethod a) Research Design}\par
Acausal comparative longitudinal investigation research design \hyperref[b22]{(Johnson, 2001)} was used for this study. Independent variables have already occurred in this study design and extraneous variables were not controlled. Past assessment results were represented by the archival data that were utilized \hyperref[b23]{(Johnson \& Christensen, 2012)}.As such, the independent variables involved in this research article were student ethnic/racial groupings (i.e., Asian, White, Hispanic, and Black) and the three dependent variables were the TAKS Exit Level English Language Arts scores in the three Information was requested using a Public Information Request form to obtain these data for a Basic Statistics course. Objectives 1-3 scores derived from the TAKS Exit Level English Language Arts reading objectives were analyzed. Within Objectives 2 and 3 of the TAKS Exit Level English Language Arts exam are expectations for students related to the demonstration of critical-thinking skills. Students are required to make connections between information previously learned and new information presented on the exam, and then students are expected to use critical-thinking skills to make predictions (Texas Education Agency Curriculum Assessment, and Technology, 2002, p. 2). Contained in the Exit Level English Language Arts exam are eight multiple choice questions each for Objective 1 (readingbasic understanding) and 2 (reading -literary elements and techniques), with one short-answer response requirement in Objective 2 (Texas Education Agency Curriculum, Assessment and Technology, 2002). Twelve multiple choice items on the assessment pertain to Objective 3 (reading -analysis and critical evaluation) as well as two short-answer items (Texas Education Agency Curriculum, Assessment and Technology, 2002).\par
Furthermore, students are asked to make connections between literature and "historical contexts and current events" and to use various written texts to compare and contrast items (Texas Education Agency Curriculum Assessment, and Technology, 2002, p. 2). State exit level assessments align with high school content and thinking standards (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) and both require students to "explore literary and expository texts with a greater depth of understanding" (Texas Education Agency Student Assessment Division, 2004, p. 4). Included in the assessment is the expectation for students to use critical-thinking skills to analyze "how literary elements and techniques contribute to a text's meaning" and to make connections between previously learned knowledge and different written texts (Texas Education Agency Student Assessment Division, 2004, p. 4). Readers are directed to the Texas Education Agency website for information regarding the score reliability and score validity of this assessment. 
\section[{VIII.}]{VIII.} 
\section[{Results}]{Results}\par
Results of statistical analyses for ethnic/racial groupings will be described by Reading Objective. The TAKS Exit Level ELA Reading Objectives are as follows: (a) Objective 1: basic understanding of texts; (b) Objective 2: apply knowledge of literary elements and evaluation of texts.\par
Results will be presented in chronological order beginning with the 2004-2005 school year and concluding with the 2011-2012 school year.\par
Prior to conducting a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) for Texas high school students who took the TAKS Exit Level English Language Arts assessment in each of the 2004-2005 through the 2011-2012 school years, its underlying assumptions were checked. Specifically examined were data normality, Box's Test of Equality of Covariance, and the Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variances. Although these assumptions were not met, the robustness of a MANOVA procedure made it appropriate to use on the data in this study  {\ref (Field, 2009)}.\par
With respect to the 2004-2005 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .92, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Using Cohen's (1988) criteria, the effect size was small.\par
Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F (1, 207583) = 1803.15, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F (1, 207583) = 2691.64, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .04, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F (1, 207583) = 4597.51, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .06, moderate effect size.\par
Scheffe`post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present by ethnicity/race for all three Reading Objectives. Of the 37 questions on the assessment contained in these three Reading Objectives, average scores were highest for Asian students, followed by White, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1, the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2, and the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, results were similar. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_3]{1} for the descriptive statistics for students' TAKS Exit Level ELA scores by Reading Objective and ethnic/racial grouping for the 2004-2005 school year. Concerning the 2005-2006 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .97, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size, by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F (1, 212078) = 1451.48, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .02, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F (1, 212078) = 1963.74, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F(1, 212078) = 1863.05, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .05, small effect size. Scheffe` post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present among ethnic/racial groupings for all three Reading Objectives with two exceptions. White and Asian students for Reading Objectives 1 and 2 did not differ in their average scores. Of the 37 questions on the assessment contained in these three Reading Objectives, average scores were highest for Asian students, followed by White, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1, the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2, and the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, results were similar. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_3]{1} for the descriptive statistics for students' TAKS Exit Level ELA scores by Reading Objective and ethnic/racial grouping for the 2005-2006 school year.\par
In the 2006-2007 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .95, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .02, small effect size, by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F (1, 218990) = 2534.04, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F (1, 218990) = 3308.01, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .04, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F (1, 218990) = 1725.94, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .02, small effect size. Scheffe` post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present among ethnic/racial groupings for all three Reading Objectives, with three exceptions. White and Asian students did not differ in their average scores on Reading Objectives 1, 2, and 3. Of the 37 questions on the assessment contained in these three Reading Objectives, average scores were highest for Asian students, followed by White, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1, the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2, and the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, results were similar. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_4]{2}  Regarding the 2007-2008 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .97, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size,by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F(1, 204780) = 1090.11, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .02, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F(1, 204780) = 1998.21, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F(1, 204780) = 1725.89, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size.\par
Scheffe` post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present among ethnic/racial groupings for all three Reading Objectives, with three exceptions. White and Asian students did not differ in their average scores on Reading Objectives 2 and 3 and Hispanic students did not differ in their average scores from Black students on Reading Objective 1. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1 and the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2, average scores were highest for White students, followed by Asian, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, average scores were highest for Asian students, followed by White, Hispanic, and then Black students. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_4]{2} for the descriptive statistics for students' TAKS Exit Level ELA scores by Reading Objective and ethnic/racial grouping for the 2007-2008 school year.\par
With respect to the 2008-2009 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .97, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size, by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Using \hyperref[b9]{Cohen's (1988)} criteria, the effect size was small. Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F (1, 215340) = 1256.65, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .02, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F (1, 215340) = 2085.09, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F (1, 215340) = 2202.54, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size. 
\section[{Volume XVI Issue X Version I}]{Volume XVI Issue X Version I} 
\section[{( G )}]{( G )}\par
Scheffe` post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present among ethnic/racial groupings for all three Reading Objectives, with three exceptions. White and Asian students did not differ in their average scores on Reading Objectives 1 and 2 and Hispanic and Black students did not differ in their average scores on Reading Objective 1. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1, average scores were highest for White students, followed by Asian, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2 and the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, average scores were highest for Asian students, followed by White, Hispanic, and then Black students. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_5]{3} for the descriptive statistics for students' TAKS Exit Level ELA scores by Reading Objective and ethnic/racial grouping for the 2008-2009 school year. Concerning the 2009-2010 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .97, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size,by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Using Cohen's (1988) criteria, the effect size was small. Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F (1, 222158) = 1024.31, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F (1, 222158) = 1900.96, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F (1, 222158) = 2292.04, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .03, small effect size.\par
Scheffe` post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present among ethnic/racial groupings for all three Reading Objectives, with one exception. White and Asian students did not differ in their average scores on Reading Objective 3. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1 and the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2, average scores were highest for White students, followed by Asian, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, followed by White, Hispanic, and then Black students. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_5]{3} for the descriptive statistics for students' TAKS Exit Level ELA scores by Reading Objective and ethnic/racial grouping for the 2009-2010 school year.\par
Regarding the 2010-2011 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .97, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size,by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Using \hyperref[b9]{Cohen's (1988)} criteria, the effect size was small. Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F (1, 221164) = 468.99, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F (1, 221164) = 1092.63, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .02, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F (1, 221164) = 1419.10, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .02, small effect size.\par
Scheffe` post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present among ethnic/racial groupings for all three Reading Objectives, with two exceptions. Asian students did not differ in their average scores from the average scores of Black and Hispanic students on Reading Objective 1. Of the 37 questions on the assessment contained in these three Reading Objectives, average scores were highest for White students, followed by Asian, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1, the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2, and the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, results were similar. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_6]{4} for the descriptive statistics for students' TAKS Exit Level ELA scores by Reading Objective and ethnic/racial grouping for the 2010-2011 school year. Finally, in the 2011-2012 school year, the MANOVA revealed a statistically significant overall difference, Wilks' ? = .99, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size, by ethnicity/race in their assessed TAKS Exit Level Reading skills. Using \hyperref[b9]{Cohen's (1988)} criteria, the effect size was small. Univariate follow-up analysis of variance procedures yielded statistically significant differences in student performance on TAKS Reading Objective 1, F (1, 229117) = 751.01, p<.001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size; TAKS Reading Objective 2, F (1, 229117) = 843.84, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size; and TAKS Reading Objective 3, F (1, 229117) = 1116.25, p< .001, partial ? 2 = .01, small effect size.\par
Scheffe` post hoc procedures revealed that statistically significant differences were present by ethnicity/race for all three Reading Objectives. Of the 37 questions on the assessment contained in these three Reading Objectives, average scores were highest for White students, followed by Asian, Hispanic, and then Black students. For the eight questions related to Reading Objective 1, the 11 questions related to Reading Objective 2, and the 18 questions related to Reading Objective 3, results were similar. Readers are referred to Table \hyperref[tab_6]{4} for the descriptive statistics for students' TAKS Exit Level ELA scores by Reading Objective and ethnic/racial grouping for the 2011-2012 school year. 
\section[{IX.}]{IX.} 
\section[{Discussion}]{Discussion}\par
The extent to which differences were present in the reading skills of Texas high school students as a function of ethnicity/race was examined in this investigation. Eight years of statewide data on three TAKS Exit Level ELA Reading Objectives were analyzed by ethnicity/race. In each school year, statistically significant results were present.\par
Following these statistical analyses, the presence of trends for the three reading skill objectives by ethnicity/race was determined. Results will be summarized in the next section. Although ethnicity/race is not commonly regarded as having a negative influence on academic achievement in reading, it is evident in the analysis of these students reading scores in this longitudinal investigation that certain ethnic/racial groupings of students consistently perform lower than others. As such, an ethnic/racial achievement gap exists and because of detailed data recording and analysis programs, state and local education agencies are fully aware and have been for decades of the disturbing ethnic/racial achievement gap. 
\section[{Reading}]{Reading}\par
According to current state accountability indexes, to be considered eligible for meeting the required standards, student subpopulations in a district or campus must show progress on state assessments. Districts and campuses are not only evaluated on overall performance of students, but also on the two largest minority ethnic/racial student groups on campus. Closing the achievement gap between student subpopulations is measured annually and assessed on the school's report card and publicized in local media entities. Proper progress monitoring and targeted intervention for struggling ethnic/racial student groupings is essential for meeting state accountability requirements.\par
To meet students' instructional needs, teachers are required to be highly qualified and certified in Reading. However, teachers in Texas are not required to obtain a Reading certification in secondary grades \hyperref[b4]{(7)}\hyperref[b6]{(8)}\hyperref[b7]{(9)}\hyperref[b9]{(10)}\hyperref[b10]{(11)}\hyperref[b11]{(12)}. Many teachers on elementary campuses have a Reading certification and most campuses hire a Reading Specialist who works with teachers and students to close existing achievement gaps. As students move to Grade 7 and above, many schools do not have the literacy resources to provide adequate interventions and reading gapswiden. Examined in this study was the relationship between ethnic/racial groupings and the reading performance of each group as determined by the TAKS Exit Level ELA assessment.\par
Results from this investigation could provide a groundwork for future researchers to expand this study by examining other content areas. Additionally, other grade levels could be examined as the TAKS assessments were administered to students in Grades 3-8 from 2002-2003 through 2011-2012. Reading performance of elementary students could be examined to determine the degree of the ethnic/racial achievement gap as students begin annual required state assessments. Moreover, in a more exhaustive study, the ethnic/racial achievement gap in reading of elementary students in Texas compared to the ethnic/racial gap of secondary students could be conducted. Additional research regarding ethnic/racial groupings would be beneficial in examining the relationship between these students' reading skills and dropout rate, completion rate, and postsecondary opportunities. Students are more likely to not complete high school if they struggle to read below grade level expectations \hyperref[b3]{(Benner et al., 2011)}. Students who do not graduate from high school could face the reality of severely diminished postsecondary employment opportunities.\par
The newer STAAR (State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness) could be considered as a source of assessment data for future investigations. Reporting and accountability of STAAR test results was inconsistent during the first three years of its existence. Scores from the STAAR assessments may yield valid data from which researchers can gather and interpret to determine whether statistically significant results exist between ethnic/racial groups. In this investigation, statistically significant differences were evident among reading skills of ethnic/racial groupings. Readers are encouraged to analyze further the relationship between reading skills and ethnicity/race. Other variables that could be considered if differences exist would be between gender groups and economic groups.\par
X. 
\section[{Conclusion}]{Conclusion}\par
The purpose of this research study was to determine the extent to which differences were present in the reading achievement of Texas high school students as a function of ethnicity/race. After obtaining and analyzing eight school years of Texas statewide data, statistically significant differences were revealed in the reading achievement of ethnic/racial groupings. In each school year between 2004-2005 and 2011-2012, Asian and White students had higher average reading scores than Hispanic and Black students. Reading scores for Asian and White students were closely aligned and almost identical across the 8-year time span. Hispanic students outperformed Black students across all eight years of data. Retrieved from http://cacs.org/research/part-4-explaning-hispanicwhite-achievement-gap/      \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.8029644268774703\textwidth}P{0.006719367588932806\textwidth}P{0.006719367588932806\textwidth}P{0.015118577075098815\textwidth}P{0.018478260869565215\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep When\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{accountability measures are considered, whether}\\
achievement\tabcellsep gaps\tabcellsep have\tabcellsep developed\tabcellsep between\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{ethnic/racial groups over time is important and if those}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{gaps have narrowed, widened, closed, or stagnated. A}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{common problem cited by researchers examining}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{student performance by ethnicity/race is that other}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{factors within each ethnic group, or common across all,}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{seem to affect results more than the students'}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{ethnicity/race itself (Bradley \& Corwin, 2002; Davis-Kean}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{\& Sexton, 2009; Hawley \& Nieto, 2010; Valenzuela,}\\
1999).\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_2}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.48311965811965807\textwidth}P{0.1561965811965812\textwidth}P{0.1344017094017094\textwidth}P{0.07628205128205127\textwidth}}
Ethnicity/Race for the 2004 -\tabcellsep 2005 and 2005 -\tabcellsep 2006 School Years\tabcellsep \\
School Year, Reading Objective, and Ethnicity/Race\tabcellsep n\tabcellsep M\tabcellsep SD\\
2004-2005\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Reading Objective 1 White Hispanic Black\tabcellsep 101,698 73,727 26,463 5,699\tabcellsep 6.63 5.96 5.58 6.80\tabcellsep 2.32 2.64 2.92 2.30\\
Asian\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}Table 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{2} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
for the\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_4}Table 2 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{3} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.4473684210526315\textwidth}P{0.1636426592797784\textwidth}P{0.12361495844875346\textwidth}P{0.11537396121883657\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Ethnicity/Race for the 2008-2009and 2009-2010 School Years}\tabcellsep \\
School Year, Reading Objective, and Ethnicity/Race\tabcellsep n\tabcellsep M\tabcellsep SD\\
2008-2009\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Reading Objective 1\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
White\tabcellsep 91,951\tabcellsep 7.25\tabcellsep 1.46\\
Hispanic\tabcellsep 89,488\tabcellsep 6.82\tabcellsep 1.66\\
Black\tabcellsep 27,435\tabcellsep 6.81\tabcellsep 1.70\\
Asian\tabcellsep 6,470\tabcellsep 7.20\tabcellsep 1.80\\
Reading Objective 2\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
White\tabcellsep 91,951\tabcellsep 8.71\tabcellsep 1.87\\
Hispanic\tabcellsep 89,488\tabcellsep 8.08\tabcellsep 2.13\\
Black\tabcellsep 27,435\tabcellsep 7.85\tabcellsep 2.21\\
Asian\tabcellsep 6,470\tabcellsep 8.72\tabcellsep 2.25\\
Reading Objective 3\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
White\tabcellsep 91,951\tabcellsep 13.56\tabcellsep 2.90\\
Hispanic\tabcellsep 89,488\tabcellsep 12.56\tabcellsep 3.31\\
Black\tabcellsep 27,435\tabcellsep 12.23\tabcellsep 3.42\\
Asian\tabcellsep 6,470\tabcellsep 13.73\tabcellsep 3.50\\
2009-2010\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Reading Objective 1\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
White\tabcellsep 90,241\tabcellsep 7.27\tabcellsep 1.44\\
Hispanic s\tabcellsep 96,232\tabcellsep 6.93\tabcellsep 1.60\\
Black\tabcellsep 28,688\tabcellsep 6.83\tabcellsep 1.68\\
Asian\tabcellsep 7,001\tabcellsep 7.22\tabcellsep 1.71\\
Reading Objective 2\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
White\tabcellsep 90,241\tabcellsep 8.81\tabcellsep 1.78\\
Hispanic\tabcellsep 96,232\tabcellsep 8.19\tabcellsep 1.99\\
Black\tabcellsep 28,688\tabcellsep 8.13\tabcellsep 2.07\\
Asian\tabcellsep 7,001\tabcellsep 8.67\tabcellsep 2.10\\
Reading Objective 3\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
White\tabcellsep 90,241\tabcellsep 13.69\tabcellsep 2.88\\
Hispanic\tabcellsep 96,232\tabcellsep 12.68\tabcellsep 3.17\\
Black\tabcellsep 28,688\tabcellsep 12.38\tabcellsep 3.36\\
Asian\tabcellsep 7,001\tabcellsep 13.74\tabcellsep 3.34\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_5}Table 3 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.45484668644906034\textwidth}P{0.11518298714144411\textwidth}P{0.08743818001978239\textwidth}P{0.12190900098911968\textwidth}P{0.07062314540059347\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Differences in Reading Skills by Ethnicity/Race for Texas High}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
average scores were highest for Asian students,\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Year 2016\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep 31\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Ethnicity/Race for the 2010-2011and 2011-2012 School Years n M Reading Objective 1 White 85,319 7.46 Hispanic 103,110 7.21 Black 26,250 7.18 School Year, Reading Objective, and Ethnicity/Race}\tabcellsep SD 1.46 1.57 1.65\tabcellsep Volume XVI Issue X Version I\\
Asian Reading Objective 2\tabcellsep 6,489\tabcellsep 7.23\tabcellsep 1.97\tabcellsep ( G )\\
White Hispanic Black Asian Reading Objective 3 White Hispanic Black Asian 2011-2012 Reading Objective 1 White Hispanic Black Asian Reading Objective 2 White\tabcellsep 85,319 103,110 26,250 6,489 85,319 103,110 26,250 6,489 84,517 110,517 26,903 7,184 84,517\tabcellsep 8.60 8.12 8.04 8.34 13.66 12.86 12.61 13.42 7.23 6.93 6.84 7.14 8.92\tabcellsep 1.86 2.01 2.09 2.43 2.85 3.07 3.21 3.77 1.49 1.59 1.65 1.81 1.83\tabcellsep Global Journal of Human Social Science -\\
Hispanic\tabcellsep 110,517\tabcellsep 8.51\tabcellsep 1.91\tabcellsep \\
Black\tabcellsep 26,903\tabcellsep 8.47\tabcellsep 2.00\tabcellsep \\
Asian\tabcellsep 7,184\tabcellsep 8.79\tabcellsep 2.22\tabcellsep \\
Reading Objective 3\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
White\tabcellsep 84,517\tabcellsep 13.88\tabcellsep 2.87\tabcellsep \\
Hispanic\tabcellsep 110,517\tabcellsep 13.20\tabcellsep 3.06\tabcellsep \\
Black\tabcellsep 26,903\tabcellsep 12.93\tabcellsep 3.18\tabcellsep \\
Asian\tabcellsep 7,184\tabcellsep 13.73\tabcellsep 3.53\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US)\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_6}Table 4 :}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{Year 2016 © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) Differences in Reading Skills by Ethnicity/Race for Texas High} 			\footnote{© 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) Differences in Reading Skills by Ethnicity/Race for Texas High} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[ Annual Review of Psychology]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		\textit{},  	 	 		\textit{Annual Review of Psychology}  		53 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Newark]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		\textit{},  		 			D E Newark 		.  		International Reading Association.  	 
\bibitem[ Developmental Neuropsychology]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		\textit{},  		 doi: 10. 1080.  	 	 		\textit{Developmental Neuropsychology}  		33  (3)  p. 5640801982486.  	 
\bibitem[Elder and Paul ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		\textit{A glossary of critical thinking terms and concepts: The critical analytic vocabulary of the English language},  		 			L Elder 		,  		 			R Paul 		.  		2013. Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.  	 
\bibitem[Academic Excellence Indicator System archives Texas Education Agency ()]{b39}\label{b39} 	 		‘Academic Excellence Indicator System archives’.  		 \url{http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/}  	 	 		\textit{Texas Education Agency}  		2005. 2007. 2009. 2011. 2012. Texas Education Agency.  		 			Texas Education Agency 		 	 	 (Academic Excellence Indicator System archives) 
\bibitem[Achievement gaps: How Hispanic and White students in public schools perform in mathematics and reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress ()]{b45}\label{b45} 	 		\textit{Achievement gaps: How Hispanic and White students in public schools perform in mathematics and reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress},  		2011. Washington, DC.  		 			U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. ; U.S. Department of Education 		 	 
\bibitem[
			JosephL M
		 ()]{b24}\label{b24} 	 		‘Adolescents can respond to intervention too: Programs that have promise for teaching basic reading skills to middle and high school students. School Psychology Forum’.  		 			JosephL M 		.  	 	 		\textit{Research in Practice}  		2008. 2  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Law and Kaufhold ()]{b25}\label{b25} 	 		\textit{An analysis of the use of critical thinking skills in reading and language arts instruction. Reading Improvement},  		 			C Law 		,  		 			J A Kaufhold 		.  		2009. 46 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Hawley and Neito (2010)]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		‘Another inconvenient truth: Race and ethnicity’.  		 			W D Hawley 		,  		 			S Neito 		.  	 	 		\textit{Educational Leadership}  		2010. November 2010. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Barnes and Slate ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		‘College-readiness rates in Texas: A statewide, multiyear study of ethnic differences’.  		 			W Barnes 		,  		 			J R Slate 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013124511423775}{10.1177/0013124511423775}.  	 	 		\textit{Education and Urban Society}  		2014. 46 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Facione ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		‘Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts’.  		 			P A Facione 		.  		 \url{http://www.Insightassessment}  	 	 		com/Resources/Critical-Thinking-What-It-Is-and-Why-It-Counts  		2015.  	 
\bibitem[Limbach and Waugh ()]{b27}\label{b27} 	 		‘Developing higher level thinking’.  		 			B Limbach 		,  		 			W Waugh 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Instructional Pedagogies}  		2010. 3 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Wright and Slate ()]{b48}\label{b48} 	 		‘Differences in critical-thinking skills for Texas middle school students as a function of economic disadvantage’.  		 			L A Wright 		,  		 			J R Slate 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Education Research}  		2015.  	 
\bibitem[Johnson and Christensen ()]{b23}\label{b23} 	 		\textit{Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches},  		 			B Johnson 		,  		 			L Christensen 		.  		2012. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  	 
\bibitem[Fuchs et al. ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		‘Effects of peer-assisted learning strategies on high school students with serious reading problems’.  		 			L S Fuchs 		,  		 			D Fuchs 		,  		 			S Kazdan 		.  	 	 		\textit{Remedial and Special Education}  		1999. 20 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Mercer et al. ()]{b30}\label{b30} 	 		‘Effects of reading fluency intervention for middle schoolers with specific learning disabilities’.  		 			C D Mercer 		,  		 			K U Campbell 		,  		 			M D Miller 		,  		 			K Mercer 		,  		 			H Lane 		.  	 	 		\textit{Learning Disabilities Research \& Practice}  		2000. 15 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Field ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		 			A Field 		.  		\textit{Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics},  				 (Thousand Oaks, CA)  		2013. Sage.  	 	 (4th ed.) 
\bibitem[Grimm ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		 			K L Grimm 		.  		\textit{Longitudinal associations between reading and mathematics achievement},  				2008.  	 
\bibitem[Salinger ()]{b37}\label{b37} 	 		‘Helping older struggling readers’.  		 			T Salinger 		.  	 	 		\textit{Preventing School Failure}  		2003. 47  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Mcardle and Hamagami ()]{b28}\label{b28} 	 		\textit{Latent difference score structural models for linear dynamic analyses with incomplete longitudinal data},  		 			J J Mcardle 		,  		 			F Hamagami 		.  		2001.  	 
\bibitem[Feldman ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		\textit{Learning to read or reading to learn: When to intervene},  		 			K Feldman 		.  		 \url{fromhttp://www.greatschools.org/students/academic-skills/839-skills-for-expository-reading.gs}  		2015.  	 
\bibitem[NAEP trends in academic progress ()]{b44}\label{b44} 	 		\textit{NAEP trends in academic progress},  		2000. Washington, DC.  		 			U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics ; U.S. Department of Education 		 	 
\bibitem[In Collins Sayer (ed.)]{b29}\label{b29} 	 		\textit{New methods for the analysis of change},  				 			L In,  			\& A Collins,  			Sayer 		 (ed.)  		 (Washington, DC)  		American Psychological Association. p. .  	 
\bibitem[No Child Left Behind: A toolkit for teachers Office of the Under Secretary ()]{b46}\label{b46} 	 		‘No Child Left Behind: A toolkit for teachers’.  	 	 		\textit{Office of the Under Secretary}  		2003.  		 			U.S. Department of Education 		 	 
\bibitem[Reardon et al. ()]{b35}\label{b35} 	 		\textit{Patterns and trends in racial academic achievement gaps among states},  		 			S F Reardon 		,  		 			R A Valentino 		,  		 			D Kalogrides 		,  		 			K A Shores 		,  		 			E H Greenberg 		.  		 \url{http://cepa.stanford.edu/content/patterns-and-trends-racial-academic-achievement-gaps-among-states-1999-2011}  		2013. 1999-2011.  	 
\bibitem[Reardon et al. ()]{b36}\label{b36} 	 		\textit{Patterns of literacy among U.S. students. The Future of Children},  		 			S F Reardon 		,  		 			R A Valentino 		,  		 			K A Shores 		.  		2012. 22 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Goldman ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		\textit{Policy Brief for Literacy Challenges for the 21st Century},  		 			S Goldman 		.  		 \url{http://futureofchildren.org/futureofchildren/publications/policy-brief/}  		2012. 22 p. .  	 	 (Adolescent literacy: Learning and understanding content) 
\bibitem[Snow et al. (ed.) ()]{b38}\label{b38} 	 		\textit{Preventing reading difficulties in young children},  		 			C E Snow 		,  		 			S M Burns 		,  		 			Griffin 		.  		P. (ed.)  		1998.  	 
\bibitem[Zabit ()]{b49}\label{b49} 	 		\textit{Problem-based learning on students' critical thinking skills in teaching business},  		 			M N Zabit 		.  		2010.  	 
\bibitem[Armbuster et al. ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		‘Put reading first: The research building blocks for teaching children to read. Kindergarten through grade 3’.  		 			B B Armbuster 		,  		 			F Lehr 		,  		 			J Osborn 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Partnership for Reading},  				 (Jessup, MD)  		2001.  	 
\bibitem[Davis-Kean and Sexton ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		‘Race differences in parental influences on child achievement’.  		 			P E Davis-Kean 		,  		 			H R Sexton 		.  	 	 		\textit{Merrill-Palmer Quarterly}  		2009. 55 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Lee ()]{b26}\label{b26} 	 		\textit{Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward equity? Educational Researcher},  		 			J Lee 		.  		 doi: 10. 3102/ 0013189X031001003.  		2002. 31 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Beck ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		\textit{Reading and reasoning. The Reading Teacher},  		 			I L Beck 		.  		1989. 42 p. .  	 
\bibitem[D.Broek (ed.)]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		\textit{Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades},  		D.Broek (ed.)  		p. .  	 
\bibitem[Hildago et al. ()]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		‘Research on families, schools and communities’.  		 			N M Hildago 		,  		 			S-F Sui 		,  		 			J L Epstein 		.  	 	 		\textit{Handbook of research on multicultural education},  				 			J A A M Banks \& C,  			Banks 		 (ed.)  		 (San Francisco, CA)  		2004. Jossey-Bass. p. .  	 	 (2nd ed.) 
\bibitem[Bradley and Corwyn ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		\textit{Socioeconomic status and child development},  		 			R H Bradley 		,  		 			R F Corwyn 		.  		2002.  	 
\bibitem[Cohen ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		\textit{Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences},  		 			J Cohen 		.  		1988. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.  	 	 (2nd ed.) 
\bibitem[Valenzuela ()]{b47}\label{b47} 	 		\textit{Subtractive schooling},  		 			A Valenzuela 		.  		1999. Albany, NY.  		 			State University of New York Press 		 	 
\bibitem[TAKS blueprint for English Language Arts Grade 10 and Grade 11 Exit Level ()]{b42}\label{b42} 	 		\textit{TAKS blueprint for English Language Arts Grade 10 and Grade 11 Exit Level},  		 \url{http://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/taks/}  		2002.  		 			Texas Education Agency Curriculum Assessment, and Technology. 		 	 
\bibitem[TAKS information booklet: Exit Level English Language Arts. Texas Education Agency ()]{b43}\label{b43} 	 		 \url{http://tea.texas.gov/student.assessment/taks/}  	 	 		\textit{TAKS information booklet: Exit Level English Language Arts. Texas Education Agency},  				2004.  	 
\bibitem[Texas Academic Performance Reports ()]{b40}\label{b40} 	 		\textit{Texas Academic Performance Reports},  		 \url{http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/tapr/index.html}  		2013.  	 
\bibitem[Texas Academic Performance Reports ()]{b41}\label{b41} 	 		\textit{Texas Academic Performance Reports},  		 \url{http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/tapr/index.html}  		2014.  	 
\bibitem[Reardon and Galindo ()]{b34}\label{b34} 	 		\textit{The Hispanic-White achievement gap in math and reading in the elementary grades},  		 			S F Reardon 		,  		 			C Galindo 		.  		2008. Stanford, CA.  		 			Institute for Research on Education Policy \& Practice 		 	 
\bibitem[Benner et al. ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		‘The influence of fidelity of implementation on the reading outcomes of middle school students experiencing reading difficulties’.  		 			G J Benner 		,  		 			J R Nelson 		,  		 			S A Stage 		,  		 			N C Ralston 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741932510361265}{10.1177/0741932510361265}.  	 	 		\textit{Remedial and Special Education}  		2011. 32 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Broek and Kremer (ed.) ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		\textit{The mind in action: What it means to comprehend during reading},  		 			P V D Broek 		,  		 			K E Kremer 		.  		B. M. Taylor, M. E. Graves, \& P. V (ed.)  		2000.  	 
\bibitem[Reardon ()]{b32}\label{b32} 	 		\textit{The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations},  		 			S F Reardon 		.  		2011.  	 	 (R) 
\bibitem[Johnson ()]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		\textit{Toward a new classification of nonexperimental quantitative research. Educational Researcher},  		 			B Johnson 		.  		 doi: 10. 3102/ 0013 189 X030002003.  		2001. 30 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Facione ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		\textit{Toward a theory of critical thinking. Liberal Education},  		 			P A Facione 		.  		1984. 70 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Onwuegbuzie and Daniel ()]{b31}\label{b31} 	 		‘Uses and misuses of the correlation coefficient’.  		 			A J Onwuegbuzie 		,  		 			L G Daniel 		.  	 	 		\textit{Research in the Schools}  		2002. 9  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Murnane & G. Duncan (ed.)]{b33}\label{b33} 	 		\textit{Whither opportunity? Rising inequality and the uncertain life chances of low-income children},  		 \url{http://cepa.stanford.edu/content/widening-academic-achievement-gap-between-rich-and-poor-new-evidence-and-possible}  		Murnane \& G. Duncan (ed.)  		New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation Press.  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
