The Arizona Department of Transportation, the Arizona Game & Fish Department and the Arizona State Parks Board are required to conduct a study every three years on watercraft fuel consumption and recreational watercraft usage. The fuel consumption data is collected to determine the allocation of motor vehicle fuel tax to the State Lake Improvement Fund. The information on recreational watercraft usage patterns on Arizona’s lakes and rivers is necessary, in part, to determine the distribution of SLIF funds to applicants.

If Arizona is going to be successful not only in improving minority access to higher education, but more importantly, minority student success in higher education, a systematic approach needs to be developed. The answers to improving minority access and achievement in higher education requires a holistic view of education as a system as well as an integrated look into the drivers of academic success. A fundamental problem exists with current policies designed to improve minority representation in higher education. Arizona’s lack of both a systematic view of the problem and the creation of a framework to evaluate policy ideas are sources of these disappointing results. The purpose of this paper is to fill in the gap by providing a framework of focus for academic success to be used to enhance Arizona’s approach to higher education policy.

One of the central purposes of public education is to provide opportunities for all children to learn and excel. Unfortunately, while gaps in educational outcomes have indeed improved substantially over the past half-century, poor and minority students are still well behind their more advantaged counterparts. There is also evidence that the positive trend has reversed course—that educational outcomes are now becoming even more inequitable. Recent policy studies by the Education Trust and Heritage Foundation have tried to identify “high-flying” schools—schools that help students reach very high levels of achievement, despite significant disadvantages. This policy brief demonstrates three major problems with the findings of these reports. (1) Due to questionable methodological assumptions, the number high-flying schools is significantly smaller than the number reported in those studies; (2) The numbers in these reports are being misused in a way that that understates the significance of, and need to address, socioeconomic disadvantages; and (3) these reports fail to directly address the vast amount of evidence that inequity in educational outcomes is primarily due to students’ social and economic disadvantages.