Equitable Access to Rigorous High School Coursework: Nationwide vs California

Introduction

For many students, rigorous college-preparatory coursework, such as Advanced Placement (AP) and Dual Enrollment (DE) programs, is that critical stepping stone to college readiness and long-term academic success. However, disparities in access persist. Our recently released brief, Realizing Equitable Access to Rigorous College-Preparatory Coursework, authored by Awilda Rodriguez, Ph.D., examines the current levels of access and distribution of these courses, as well as the downstream effects that inequities in advanced course access and enrollment rates have on students’ ability to obtain four-year degrees. Research has consistently underscored the value of rigorous coursework, with dual enrollment participation linked to improved academic readiness, particularly in math and English, as well as greater confidence in navigating college systems, serving as a primer for college success. Similarly, participation in AP courses has been associated with higher college enrollment and completion rates. 

That report was nationally focused, utilizing national data, and its recommendations were targeted towards a national audience. In this spotlight, we examine how California compares to the nation in terms of access to and distribution of college-prep coursework, and to what extent the recommendations in the original piece are applicable to the California context.  

California is home to a racially and ethnically diverse student population, with Latinx students alone making up more than half of public K-12 enrollment. Supporting the success of this growing majority of Latinx, Black, Asian American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NHPI), and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) students is core to building a stronger state economy and a more inclusive future. At a time when the national landscape poses significant challenges to closing educational equity gaps—from the rollback of race-conscious college admissions policies to dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts—California’s leadership is needed to ensure that all students, regardless of their background, have access to rigorous coursework that prepares them for college success.

Advanced Coursework Enrollment

Overall, California students enroll in advanced coursework at rates above the national average, although there is notable variation depending on the type of coursework. Over 1 in 5 (21%) of California students are enrolled in at least one AP course, well above the national average of approximately 15%. California’s International Baccalaureate (IB) enrollment was similarly ahead, although, as in the rest of the nation, IB coursework is not widely available. California’s DE rates lag slightly behind the national average, though it’s worth noting that these numbers are from the 2020-2021 school year. California has made substantial strides towards increasing dual enrollment access in recent years.  

College Preparatory Course Access Varies Substantially by Race/Ethnicity 

Although overall access to advanced coursework in California is relatively strong, participation varies widely across both schools and student groups, underscoring persistent inequities that are very similar to those found on the national level. Asian American students have by far the highest participation rates, with 34% in AP and 16% in DE courses. Latinx students (18% AP, 11% DE) and Black students (15% AP, 11% DE) enroll in these courses at far lower rates than Asian and white students. 

One key reason for these persistent equity gaps is the variability of advanced coursework availability between schools. Schools with higher rates of students from minoritized backgrounds offer fewer of these courses, as was the case nationally. As shown below in Figure 3, using the same decile analysis as the original report, California schools with higher rates of Latinx, Black, and American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) students offer fewer AP courses per 500 students, and the difference in Advanced Calculus is particularly large. This difference is notably larger than we find when examining the difference between schools with the highest (87%) and lowest (89%) minoritized representation that offer any advanced coursework at all. This indicates that for California, while schools with high minoritized representation offer at least some advanced coursework at nearly the same rate as those with little to no minoritized representation, they offer far fewer of these courses on a per-student basis. 

Attracting and retaining faculty members with the required certifications are potential causes for the relatively lower rates of advanced coursework offered at schools with high rates of minoritized students. This issue is particularly pervasive in advanced math courses, where properly certified and credentialed teachers can be difficult to find. California schools with the highest rates of minoritized students have nearly triple the amount of uncertified math teachers as those with the fewest, and have nearly half as many Calculus courses taught by certified teachers. The scale of the problem at the state level isn’t quite as severe as it is nationally, where the average number of uncertified math teachers per school is twice as high; however, the disproportionate likelihood of these teachers working in schools with high levels of minoritized students remains. Inequities in advanced coursework stem from the unequal distribution of resources that favor wealthier districts, leaving racially isolated, “hard-to-staff” schools with fewer certified teachers. 

Access Beyond Course Availability

Another key similarity to our findings at the national level is that, as shown above, while California schools with higher minoritized populations may offer fewer advanced courses, these differences are insufficient to account for the sizable equity gaps shown in Figure 2. If course availability in schools with high rates of minoritized students was the only issue, we would expect to find that among schools with similar AP course availability levels, these equity gaps would be smaller or nonexistent. Course-taking rates for all students, including minoritized students, are substantially higher within schools with more advanced course availability, but the disparities between racial/ethnic groups remain largely untouched. In fact, in terms of absolute size, gaps are larger among schools with high rates of AP course availability (4^th quartile) than those with low availability (1st quartile). The persistence of these equity gaps across schools with varying levels of advanced course availability suggests that increasing course offerings is a necessary but insufficient step to eliminate equity gaps. Furthermore, as is the case nationally, this data indicates that the largest share of responsibility for the statewide gaps illustrated in Figure 2 is found not between schools, but within them. 

School-level policies appear to play a key role in these distributional gaps. In the brief, Dr. Rodriguez highlights a variety of school policies that contribute to the equity gaps discussed above, including onerous applications and student/parent contracts, requirements of letters of recommendations, pre-requisite courses that stretch as far back as middle school, and hidden costs for dual enrollment programs, which have disproportionate impacts on students from minoritized backgrounds. These requirements tend to reinforce tracking, restrict student opportunities, and grant school personnel disproportionate power over who can enroll in rigorous, college-prep courses.  

Enabling Universal Access to Advanced Coursework 

Despite California outperforming the national average in overall availability of college preparatory courses, persistent ethnic and racial gaps in access to rigorous coursework continue to limit students’ college readiness. Addressing these inequities requires a comprehensive approach that ensures equitable access to college-credit bearing high school courses, aligns dual enrollment courses with University of California and California State University transfer requirements, and invests in high-quality online or blended learning to expand opportunities to schools with limited resources. Reducing barriers also means removing exclusionary policies, such as restrictive contracts and burdensome prerequisites, and addressing hidden costs like transportation and materials. 

To reduce equity gaps in rigorous course-taking, high schools will need to ensure that all students have access to college-bearing credit programs in core subjects such as math, science, English, history, and a foreign language. Districts should audit their course offerings to ensure equitable distribution, benchmark dual enrollment credits against four-year institutions, and expand online coursework where appropriate. Schools must also eliminate exclusionary practices, including student and parent contracts, convoluted application processes, and unnecessary prerequisites that limit access, while providing targeted advising and support to ensure students can succeed in advanced courses. Addressing hidden costs that disproportionately impact students from low-income backgrounds is equally important. States should cover the cost of dual enrollment programs, including tuition, materials, and associated expenses such as transportation and meals, to prevent financial barriers from limiting participation. Implementing these holistic strategies fosters equitable opportunities that prepare all students for college and career readiness. To read a full discussion of these strategies and their implementation, see our recently released brief, Realizing Equitable Access to Rigorous College-Preparatory Coursework.  

Back to Top