Schools for Tomorrow Blog

Read this blog post from Washington Monthly about the reasons socio-economic school integration can’t work in major cities. But read all the way down for thoughts on why the battle isn’t hopeless, and then read the comments for an interesting and lively back and forth.

It only took 13 months after the U.S. Supreme Court destroyed the last vestiges of race-based school integration, but the  New York Times Magazine finally figured out that socio-economic integration might be a nifty idea.

School integration based on socio-economics is an issue a handful of us have been shouting about for years. But our appeals have fallen on deaf ears. Perhaps the spread in the Times will help. Or perhaps the court’s abysmal decision will force school districts to get creative.

In any case, the Times seems finally to get it:

And the effects of those high concentrations of poverty were striking: poor students in Louisville [Kentucky] black and white, fared worse when they attended schools filled with other poor kids. 

For a somewhat outdated but thorough examination of the issue, read this publication. Disclaimer: I wrote it.

There are rumblings emanating from Boulder Valley School District, and they don’t have anything to do with exploding tofu factories or yoga studios.  Rather, the hubbub is due to a parent petition that would split the district right down the middle. 

The move is opposed by district bigwigs, including the superintendent and the president of the school board, and for good reason.  Splitting the district would not only be logistically onerous, but it would compromise the quality of one of the best school districts in the state.

BVSD is surprisingly diverse.  It’s 55 schools are spread over 500 square miles, and encompass affluent Boulder enclaves, newer suburbs, working class neighborhoods, and mountain towns.  The petition highlights an ongoing conflict in Boulder and other districts throughout the country.  A natural tension exists between the parents, usually white and affluent, who are deeply involved in their children’s schools, and the district and community at large, who are charged with providing a high quality education to all kids in the district, not just those who happen to live in wealthier areas. 

While it is laudable for parents to be involved in their kids’ schooling, too many parents are getting caught up in the “me first” thinking that creates systemic inequities in the first place.  Splitting BVSD would magnify the educational inequities that already exist in the district.  For example, while the district’s CSAP scores typically exceed the state average, its achievement gap between white and Latino students also ranks near the widest in Colorado.

Rather than Balkanize a high-performing district, Boulder Valley’s parents should work to make sure that every child in the district has access to a high quality education, whether they live in a two million dollar mansion on two room apartment.

Richard Kahlenberg, a tireless champion for the cause of socioeconomic school integration, sees a silver lining in last June’s Supreme Court decision effectively outlawing race-based school integration.

Last week, for the first time in recent memory, a high-profile politician took on issues of race and class that are usually confined to university classrooms and barber shops.  Barack Obama’s speech was notable for a number of reasons, not least of which was its even, thoughtful tone.  Perhaps Obama’s greatest moment of righteous indignation came when he addressed the relationship between racial inequality and education:

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven’t fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today’s black and white students.

Obama’s speech provides an opportunity for us to ponder the relationship between race and schooling in our own backyard.  Here in Colorado, for example, fewer than half of all students of color graduate high school, and the number of black students who score at the highest levels on the CSAP in our urban schools is embarrassingly small. 

We’re right to hold schools and districts accountable for those things within their control, such as refusing to accept low expectations for certain groups of kids, and providing the means to assess the progress of different subgroups of children.  But some of the most effective means of achieving educational equality lie beyond schools. 

Consider, for example, housing integration, which can have a variety of positive effects on the achievement gap.  We know that kids of color perform better in more integrated schools than in more homogenous ones, and there are other advantages, too.  The Rev. Jeremiah Wright hullabaloo reminded us once again how differently blacks and whites perceive the American experience.  Sharing fences, parks, and schools with neighbors who look different from you is perhaps the single best way to promote mutual understanding.

How to integrate neighborhoods?  Well, that’s a different post for a different blog.  But we should keep in mind that achieving educational equality is a task that goes well beyond teachers, schools, and districts.  Only visionary thinking at the broadest level, combined with good old fashioned perspiration at the smallest, will get us there.

Today�s Denver Post article about expanding admission criteria for the Denver Public Schools� Highly Gifted and Talented program is eliciting some ugly reaction, to judge from the paper�s website. Part of the problem, undoubtedly, stems from the story�s unfortunate headline and choice of  photo � neither of which, by the way, are the fault of the reporter, Jeremy P. Meyer.

Here�s what a friend wrote to Jeremy today:

I thought your story today was very interesting and seemed to be well-reported.  I am concerned about the headlines and photos, however.  (I�m a former Post reporter � I know you don�t have any involvement in either.)  �Minorities� do not get a lift in the program, as you described it.  Rather, it�s focused on poor and ESL kids. The photos exacerbate the problem � both focus on what appear to be black children.  There is no benefit given to black children, as I understand your story.  If you need proof that the headline and photos give an incorrect impression, look at the following comment:

Love the message this sends. A score of 75 from a black kid is equal to a 90 from a White kid. Finally the true racists are being honest. Achievement at school is nice and all, but it takes a back seat to �social justice�. School administrators would rather promote a black kid with a C average than a White student with straight A�s. That�s been the case for several years. But at least now, they are being upfront about it. A color blind society? Not when noticing color gets us all these perks!

My friend is right. And the ugly comments keep on coming. Here�s a small sample:

What a crock of doo doo. Chihuahua, Colorado. Sickening. These kids DO NOT deserve extra credit based on their race or illegality or *economic disadvantage*. TOTAL, COMPLETE BS. My kid is highly gifted based on brain power, not some wimpy *extra credit for being illegals* system. YUCK.

***

Sure give the illegal immigrant kids a bonus because their parents snuck them in here or gave birth to them just over the border. This is truly pathetic and only gives fuel to the illegal immigrant issue. If nothing else they should be deported along with their illegal parents.

***

Highly gifted at milking the system…

***

Lost in all the reactionary hysteria is the simple fact that an overhaul of the HGT system is long overdue. And I say that as a parent whose kid benefited from the top-flight teachers and small class sizes that have always been an integral part of the program.

My understanding has always been that highly gifted was supposed to apply to kids who tested at the 99^th percentile. But DPS consistently bent this rule, in my experience. I�ve known kids who truly are highly gifted, to the extent that they couldn�t function well in a regular classroom. These are kids who are �out there,� who often seem inwardly focused, single-minded, and socially awkward. They need a program that in reality is a form of special education.

What DPS has done over the years (and I can only speak with authority about the 1990s, when my daughter was in the program), is to relax the rules so that kids who test exceptionally well get labeled highly gifted. This is a great strategy for keeping affluent families in DPS, but it�s not highly gifted education.

There�s conflicting research about whether cognitive ability tests, IQ tests and the like are culturally biased. But I have no doubt they are biased in favor of kids who come from privileged backgrounds.

Unless you�re a crank who believes that poor people are poor because they�re stupid, you have to acknowledge that kids who come from enriched homes, where a parent is almost always present, where there�s ample intellectual and sensory stimulation, are going to be more prepared to succeed in school and on tests, even those that purport to cut through the biases and drill down to cognitive ability.

So if DPS is tacitly acknowledging that the HGT identification system has been inherently biased for years, and is now moving to eliminate that bias, I say bravo. It�s about time.

And why are those cranky commenters so angry? I bet they�re worried that some low-income kid, given equal educational opportunity, is going to run intellectual circles around their children, �highly gifted� or not. Perish the thought.  

I�ve deliberately left the race angle out of this post, but I�ve no doubt that�s what really chaps these commenters hides. But I�ll leave that hot-button topic for another day.

The new Profiles of Success study that got some good ink today is notable in a couple of respects.

First, it reinforces what we already know about what makes schools work for low-income kids. I suppose a less charitable way of saying this is that the report offers nothing new, but there�s great value in hammering home these points time and again until they begin to sink in where it matters.

Second, the study demonstrates just how hard it is to close achievement gaps. Only 39 of the roughly 1,750 public schools in Colorado have demonstrably closed achievement gaps in some grades for three consecutive years. That�s just over 2 percent �  pretty lousy odds.

The study finds that schools closing the gap are engaging in a common set of practices, or have common attributes. Among them are a culture of high expectations and accountability, targeted assessments and intensive use of data to guide instruction, individualized support for struggling students, stable and consistent leadership, small learning communities, and so forth.

We�ve heard all these before, and for good reason: They work. But it takes exceptional leadership, in place for many years, to make these things happen.

I was happy to see that one of the common attributes of these schools was an economically integrated student body. In fact, the study

found that no elementary or K-8 school qualified that had more than 70% of their enrollment made up of free or reduced lunch students. For middle and high schools, no school with more than 45% free or reduced lunch enrollment qualified for our study�

�the fact that no schools qualified for our study that had higher concentrations of economically disadvantaged students, indicate the difficulty involved with closing the achievement gap when there is no enrollment balance in terms of student economic background. Instead, our work indicates that having a more balanced mix of students is more desirable.

And one of the study�s recommendations echoes what I have been advocating for many years now:

Districts can create enrollment policies that encourage economic integration through
choice. For example, in places where school choice exists and the number of applicants
exceeds available slots, schools can weight the admissions lottery process in order to ensure that a mix of students from various socio-economic backgrounds can attend. Districts can also purposefully target locations or create programs for new schools that will draw a mix of students from different socioeconomic backgrounds. APA�s data demonstrates that students who are eligible for free or reduced lunch do well in such settings and other studies have come to similar conclusions.

The death of Rachel Noel, a true giant in the history of Denver public education, should not pass unremarked.

I had the privilege of getting to know Ms. Noel during my years as a reporter covering Denver Public Schools for The Denver Post. This was during the mid-1990s, when DPS was released from the federal court order mandating school busing for integration. School board members were hell-bent on returning to neighborhood schools, and nothing was going to slow them down.

Noel, who pushed for school integration in the late 1960s and early 1970s, as the first African American woman on the Denver school board, was one of the few wise voices counseling a more judicious approach. Even then her health was frail, but she came out of retirement to testify at several school board meetings about the inherent benefits of integrated schools.

She saw the school board�s complete abandonment of integration as a tragedy. But her passionately argued positions were viewed as old-fashioned, and she was respectfully shunted aside.

Well, with DPS more segregated than ever, and achievement among kids of color as low as it has ever been, Noel�s admonitions are looking downright prophetic. The days of court-ordered busing are gone, probably forever. But school boards still could�and should�look at integration (by socioeconomic status rather than race) as an organizing principle for their school districts.

Successive DPS regimes have stubbornly declined even to consider integrated schools in their decisions about program location, school closures and new schools. It�s a shortsighted position to take, driven more by fear of political backlash than any legitimate educational or social considerations.

With Noel�s passing, integration in Denver is fading into the distant past.