or a man named Jake. But it isnt the fault of their names. If two black boys, Jake Williams and DeShawn Williams, are born in the same neighborhood and into the same familial and economic circum- stances, they would likely have similar life outcomes. But the kind of parents who name their son Jake dont tend to live in the same neigh- borhoods or share economic circumstances with the kind of parents who name their son DeShawn. And thats why, on average, a boy named Jake will tend to earn more money and get more education than a boy named DeShawn. A DeShawn is more likely to have been handicapped by a low-income, low-education, single-parent back- ground. His name is an indicator-not a cause-of his outcome. Just as a child with no books in his home isnt likely to test well in school, a boy named DeShawn isnt likely to do as well in life. And what if DeShawn had changed his name to Jake or Connor: would his situation improve? Heres a guess: anybody who bothers to change his name in the name of economic success is-like the high- school freshmen in Chicago who entered the school-choice lottery- at least highly motivated, and motivation is probably a stronger indicator of success than, well, a name.       Just as the ECLS data answered questions about parenting that went well beyond the black-white test gap, the California names data tell a lot of stories in addition to the one about distinctively black names. Broadly speaking, the data tell us how parents see themselves-and, more significantly, what kind of expectations they have for their chil- dren. Heres a question to begin with: where does a name come from, anyway? Not, that is, the actual source of the name-that much is usually obvious: theres the Bible, theres the huge cluster of tradi- tional English and Germanic and Italian and French names, there are